Agenda, first session — Del Mar City Council, January 10, 2022

Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda

VIA TELECONFERENCE ONLY
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
January 10, 2022 City Council Meeting

INFORMATION RECEIVED

AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA

WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 From: Francis V. Chisari <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 12:11 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Dwight Worden; Tracy Martinez; David Druker; Dan Quirk; Terry Gaasterland Subject: Red Dot. Agenda Item 1 - State of the City
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

January 7, 2022
Dear Mayor and Members of the Del Mar City Council,
I have been following the number of new COVID-19 cases in Del Mar every week on the San Diego County website. Here are the numbers from the past several weeks:

Date Total # cases since
December 2020
Increase in # cases in
1 week
December 8, 2021 158 +3
December 15, 2021 160 +2
December 22, 2021 173 +13
December 29, 2021 190 +17
January 5, 2022 324 +134
These numbers illustrate that the state of the City is precarious vis-a-vis the COVID-19 pandemic. The numbers also illustrate why I wrote to you on October 13th, again on December 13th and again on December 20th asking that you require evidence of full vaccination, including a booster, in addition to wearing a mask, as a condition for entry into all public indoor spaces in Del Mar. s
We are now in the middle of the current explosion of cases in Del Mar that might have been avoidable if that policy had been implemented back then. We don’t know how long this surge will last but, even though the horse may already be out of the barn at this point, the risk of inaction now is too high to look the other way.

If you attended the recent DMCC holiday party, you know how many vulnerable seniors live in Del Mar; folks who would leave a giant hole in our community if they were taken from us prematurely by an infection they could have avoided from an unvaccinated or unmasked neighbor or visitor at a shop or restaurant in town.

Less visible but no less vulnerable are folks of all ages, including kids, who have asthma, or heart disease, diabetes, cancer, organ transplant recipients, etc, that put them at greater risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death from this surging infection.

The numbers in the chart above don’t lie. This is now an emergency in Del Mar and it needs your urgent attention. Therefore, I respectfully ask all of you one more time, this time publicly, to urgently adopt a policy requiring proof of vaccination and wearing of a mask in public indoor spaces in Del Mar. 1 January 10, 2022 Item 01
2 Since I assume it’s too late to add this to the agenda for your meeting next Monday, January 10th, I urge you to schedule a public ad hoc meeting on this topic for discussion, debate and, hopefully, adoption of a policy that protects Del Mar’s vulnerable citizens as soon as possible, ideally next week.

Sincerely,
Francis V. Chisari, M.D.

Crest Road, Del Mar
Professor, Emeritus
Dept of Immunology and Microbiology
The Scripps Research Institute
2 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Bud <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 12:41 PM
To: Francis V. Chisari
Cc: City Clerk Mail Box; Dwight Worden; Tracy Martinez; David Druker; Dan Quirk; Terry Gaasterland
Subject: Re: Red Dot. Agenda Item 1 - State of the City CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thank u Frank!!
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 7, 2022, at 12:11 PM, Francis V. Chisari <[email protected]> wrote:

Since I assume it’s too late to add this to the agenda for your meeting next Monday, January 10th, I urge you to schedule a public ad hoc meeting on this topic for discussion, debate and, hopefully, adoption of a policy that protects Del Mar’s vulnerable citizens as soon as possible, ideally next week.

Sincerely,
Francis V. Chisari, M.D.

Crest Road, Del Mar
Professor, Emeritus
Dept of Immunology and Microbiology
The Scripps Research Institute
2 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Debbie H <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 8:26 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box; Dwight Worden; Tracy Martinez; David Druker; Dan Quirk; Terry Gaasterland
Subject: Red Dot Agenda Item 1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Council and Mayor Worden- Let's listen to experts, like Frank Chisari who deeply care about our community.

PLEASE require all people be masked, vaccinated and boosted for all events within the City of Del Mar. If a further booster becomes advised by the CDC, please leave your legislative open ended to include that.

These numbers are alarming. I am a senior citizen of high risk. It is scary to think that a simple trip to a store in Del Mar or a meeting at the Community Center could put me at risk. Please do this. Thank you.

Date Total # cases since
December 2020
Increase in # cases in
1 week
December 8, 2021 158 +3
December 15, 2021 160 +2
December 22, 2021 173 +13
December 29, 2021 190 +17
January 5, 2022 324 +134
--
Debbie Hecht
(808) 989-3222
Website: Thoughts and Theories: www.debbiehecht.com
1 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Jon Luft <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 8:31 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot, Agenda Item 1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Honorable Mayor and City Council Member's
Following, among other leading experts, the insightful and wise observations of immunologist and Del Mar resident Frank Chisari, there is now an emergency in Del Mar related to the spread of the Covid virus and it must have your urgent attention. I ask all of you to immediately do everything in your power to adopt a policy requiring proof of vaccination and boosters and wearing of a mask in public indoor spaces in Del Mar.

Respectfully,
Jon Luft
248 27th st
Del Mar
2 January 10, 2022 Item 01
AREA CASES POPULATION CASES/100K* % VACCINATED
CASES on
July 1, 2021
6 month
increase
new cases in
unvaccinated**
6 month
case
rate/100K
Del Mar 324 3,954 8,194 90.60% 154 170 136 4299
92014 954 14,138 6,748 90.60% 815 139 111 983
*since 3/2020
**80%
countywide
The above Table shows updated COVID cases in Del Mar and the 92014 Zip code reported on January 5th, 2022. The Omicron variant now accounts for over 90% of reported cases, and infections are spreading 437% faster in Del Mar than in the entire 92014 Zip code.

It is thus clear that infections acquired in Del Mar are responsible for the surge in infections in the 92014 Zip Code.

Although the Omicron variant appears to cause less severe clinical symptoms than the previously prevalent Delta variant, it is highly transmissible and is infecting many more people including those who have been fully vaccinated. The result is impacts on many critical services (healthcare, police, fire, school) as workers test positive for COVID infection even if they are asymptomatic.

Infection with the Omicron variant is particularly dangerous for those with compromised immune responses, which includes those being treated for cancer, organ transplant recipients, recipients of immunosuppressing drugs for other conditions, and the elderly.

Even if Omicron is only 10% as lethal as Delta, it is at least 4 times more transmissible, and it is likely to cause more deaths in the coming weeks (the peak of deaths due to COVID lags the peak of infections by 3-4 weeks). The secondary impacts of the high rate of infections on healthcare workers could also add to the death toll.

It is never too late to get a booster shot if you are vaccinated. Proper mask wearing can reduce the aerosol transmission of the Omicron variant by up to 90%, and it should be encouraged. We need to do everything possible to protect the vulnerable in our community.

Donald Mosier, MD, PhD
Professor Emeritus, Scripps Research
3 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Anne Farrell <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2022 9:29 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot, Agenda Item 1 / Protecting our community CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor Worden and City Councilmembers,
Last fall, we wrote to then-Mayor Gaasterland and the Councilmembers, asking for your leadership in protecting our community from the spread of COVID-19. We asked that the City take more decisive action against the pandemic dangers we face, and specifically that Del Mar businesses require patrons to be masked and show evidence of full vaccination in order to gain entry into all public indoor spaces.

For reasons that we still do not understand, you did not act then, which we found surprising given that our council includes members with medical and scientific backgrounds; we know that you all must have been as concerned as we are about the dangers of the pandemic, yet the majority of you punted on this issue and seemed to be more concerned with the business community than the citizens of our city.

Unfortunately, we are now in a crisis situation, with an explosion of COVID-19/variant cases in Del Mar, as is described by Dr. Francis Chisari in his January 7th letter to you. Dr. Chisari is one of the many distinguished scientists and doctors in Del Mar who have been clamoring for months for City Council action on this matter. He shared with you this chart, and the numbers tell a scary tale.

Date Total # cases since
December 2020
Increase in # cases in 1 week
December 8, 2021 158 +3
December 15, 2021 160 +2
December 22, 2021 173 +13
December 29, 2021 190 +17
January 5, 2022 324 +134
We know that the City Council scheduling rules may prohibit your adding this critical and emergency item to the Monday agenda, but we join with Dr. Chisari and so many others in Del Mar in urging you to immediately schedule an ad hoc public meeting on this topic so it can be discussed and debated, if you cannot discuss it on Monday. Our hope is that this time, you will make the right decision. It is urgent that you adopt a safe, prudent, and appropriate policy for our community that will protect ALL our citizens, young and old.

Sincerely,
Anne and John Farrell
Via Alta, Del Mar
4 January 10, 2022 Item 01
2 5 January 10, 2022 Item 01
Red Dot Letter, Agenda Item 1, State of the City
Email to [email protected]
January 9, 2022
To the Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I am writing to second the plea made in Frank Chisari’s Red Dot Letter of January 7.

I hope you will recognize its urgency and necessity, and act accordingly.

We are in a public health crisis. The table showing the weekly increases in Del Mar cases of Covid-19 should be convincing proof: last week a jump from 17 to 134.

We are in a situation as a community where all of us depend on each of us doing the right thing. Individuals will, of course, see ‘the right thing’ differently. That is why we have public authority. It is up to you to recognize what is happening and exercise your authority. Please require evidence of full vaccination, including a booster, in addition to wearing a mask, as a condition for entry into all public spaces in Del Mar.

Sincerely,
Jeff Barnouw
705 Amphitheatre Drive
6 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Jan McMillan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 11:37 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Support for Dr. Frank Chisari's Red Dot, Agenda Item 1, on your upcoming meeting, January 10, regarding mandatory proof of vaccination and wearing of masks in all public indoor spaces in Del Mar.

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and members of the Del Mar City Council,
I strongly support Dr. Frank Chisari’s recommendation that you hold a public ad hoc meeting as soon as possible to discuss adopting a policy requiring proof of vaccination and wearing of masks in all public indoor spaces in Del Mar. As compassionate people, we need to think not only of protecting ourselves from Covid but also preventing us from spreading the virus to others if we might unknowingly be infected with it.

Thank you for your serious consideration.

Jan McMillan
Twelfth St.

Del Mar
7 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Suzi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 1:31 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot. Agenda Item 1-State of the City
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

After becoming aware of the huge increase in Covid -19 cases in Del Mar over this past month, I would like to express support for
Dr. Frank Chisari's excellent suggestion that the Del Mar Council act to protect all of our citizens, with primary focus on the most vulnerable, by requiring proof of full vaccination in indoor public spaces in Del Mar.

I feel that this idea should be viewed as sound professional public health advice aimed at maintaining our caring community spirit by protecting each other and those that visit our community.

Thank you,
Suzi Resnik
Susan Resnik, Dr.PH,MSAM,CHES
Former Director of Health Education The National Hemophilia Foundation Author Blood Saga;The Emergence and Empowerment of the US Hemophilia Community 8 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: David Borman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 5:10 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot message, Agenda Item I
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

This message is sent to support Dr Chisari’s strong plea and advice to improve health security for our community.

Public health can be improved by requiring full vaccination and booster confirmation and masking for indoor public spaces. The peril of COVID illness jeopardizes us all and can be minimized by Council action, as the good doctor sensibly and urgently recommends. Del Mar lives are at stake.

If the Council falters in the matter, a timely public ad hoc meeting might guide it toward prudent action.

Sent by David Borman
Klish Way
9 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: John and Wendy Ross <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:35 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot agenda item 1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To the Mayor and City Council:

My wife and I were truly shocked to learn of the meteoric rise in the number of new COVID cases in Del Mar since December 29. We urge you to “rise to the occasion” and declare an interim local public health emergency condition that requires masking in all Del Mar’s indoor public spaces.

Thank you for your attention.

John and Wendy Ross
Klish Way
10 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 10:34 AM
To: Dwight Worden; City Clerk Mail Box; David Druker; Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; Dan Quirk
Cc: Sudeepto Roy
Subject: Red dot: Agenda item #1 Mayor's State of the City Address CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor Worden and Councilmembers,
As you address the State of the City, today, in Agenda item #1, it is urgent that you discuss and react to the shocking increase in Covid-19 infection in the County, in our City, and its possible impact on the unvaccinated children and immunocompromised and vulnerable populations. Kids are suffering from scattered education and politicized protocols, and so many adults in Del Mar are immunocompromised, or live with health conditions that place them at higher risk of developing severe outcomes or death.

As elected officials, it is in your power to do everything you can to make Del Mar a safe home for our most vulnerable residents. With San Diego County reaching its highest weekly rate of new cases (about 50,000 cases are expected), what more do we need to have our Council take a stance and protect their most vulnerable? Several times already, residents have requested the Councilmembers to adopt a policy requiring a proof of vaccination to enter restaurants, and mask wearing in public indoor locations within Del Mar. So many other cities have done it already.

Please do the right thing and keep the people of Del Mar safe.

Valerie Dufort-Roy & Sudeepto Roy
Klish Way
1 January 10, 2022 Item 01
To: City Clerk ([email protected]) <[email protected]> Subject: Red Dot, Agenda Item 1 / State of the City
Dear Honorable Mayor Worden and City Council Members,
Thank you for your past support of Del Mar’s Ghost Gun ban. Your leadership has inspired the County of San Diego to consider on January 11 an expanded ordinance including 3-D printers, safe storage and an intervention program. As you know, I founded NeverAgainCA to end the gun shows at our Fairgrounds after Parkland and our focus is saving lives, particularly the lives of our youth.

Yesterday, Rady Children’s Hospital announced that admittances of children suffering from Covid have tripled in the past two weeks. I am asking for your leadership again to protect our youth. The fear of an unknown virus which may result in life altering health, or death, is as great as the fear of random gun violence.

Through this pandemic we have asked a lot of our children. I appeal to you, again, for your leadership for Del Mar to do its part during this latest spike of another version of the pandemic. None of us knows the number of deaths that will follow this spike although hospitalizations are a leading indicator.

Our city has wisely protected the city staff and the Council by meeting virtually; you have required city employees to be vaccinated and you have required proof of vaccination at all indoor city properties. It should not be a big ask to do the same for Del Mar businesses, particularly restaurants. From NYC to LA cities are following this best practice for commerce and so are you.

Please consider a resolution to encourage all Del Mar business owners to require their employees to be vaccinated and ask proof of vaccination from guests. I hope that you can call a special meeting to pass this resolution soon and suggest you set the end date of this resolution to the expiration of the indoor mask mandate of the state.

Working with the DMVA you can post and promote those businesses that are in compliance on the city’s communication tools.

We can lead and admit only vaccinated people to our businesses or we can follow the admission of overwhelming numbers of unvaccinated people to hospitals later. This is the pandemic of the unvaccinated and our children who are under 5 years of age are most vulnerable.

We don’t need to be complicit in the deaths of our youth and we don’t 1 January 10, 2022 Item 01
need our businesses to shut down because of employee illness. We need a thriving business community and this resolution will put Del Mar in a leadership role in the county again. I believe that this is an important act to make residents and visitors safe.

Respectfully submitted,
Rose Ann Sharp
834 Crest Road
Del Mar, Ca. 92014
2 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: FW: Epidemic emergency red dot
-----Original Message-----
From: james emerson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:03 AM
To: worden dwight <[email protected]>; Terry Gaasterland <[email protected]>; David DrukerPrivate <[email protected]>; Tracy Martinez <[email protected]>; Quirk Dan <[email protected]> Cc: Ashley Jones <[email protected]>
Subject: Epidemic emergency red dot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Council Majority,
You are literally dealing with life and death issues with our infection numbers. Please recognize your top priority is the health and safety of our citizens. Forget economic and political considerations. Listen to the scientists who have been trying to help you. I hope your consciences are clear. Our lives depend on you.

Bud Emerson
Sent from my iPad
1 January 10, 2022 Item 01
1 From: Jim Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 6:49 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: January 10th council meeting comment Regarding item 7, River Path Del Mar.

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Regarding item 7, River Path Del Mar.

If Del Mar City Council votes to approve accelerated design, I will encourage the San Dieguito River Valley Conservancy to approve up to $100,000 for the design of the River Path Del Mar phase 3. I understand that there is risk in beginning design before all of the permits are in hand. Perhaps the risks can be reduced by informing the design firm that some minor changes may be expected.

I am hopeful that acceleration of design may encourage other agencies involved in the environmental permitting review process to accelerate their own efforts to allow for the possibility of construction on this project to start in 2022.

Sincerely,
Jim Smith
San Dieguito River Valley board president
1 January 10, 2022 Item 07
1 From: Joe Sullivan <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 5:02 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot for January 10 Council Meeting
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

TO: Del Mar City Council
FROM: Joe & Alice Sullivan
Ocean Front
SUBJ: Item 13: Pickleball Pilot Program
We support the staff recommendation for option two (one tennis court, one pickleball court) for the pilot program.

Happy New Year.
1 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: becky beckywalkerinc.com <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 4:46 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; City Manager Mail Box; Ashley Jones Subject: RED DOT LETTER: Pickleball Courts in Del Mar
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I’m writing to voice my support for getting 4 Pickleball courts in Del Mar. Since one Tennis court (which serves 2 - 4) can be converted to 4 Pickleball Courts (which serves 16 people), it’s difficult to understand why our Community Tennis Courts shouldn’t also be used for Pickleball. There are quite a few very interested players that live in Del Mar and have to go all the way to Encinitas to play.

I began playing when one of our Del Martians, Dee Davis posted a note on Nextdoor saying “Pickleball Anyone” and she received close 100 responses. I was one of those responses and since then have made some really good friends and had a lot of fun challenging myself. It’s making people get out and get exercise while also creating a wonderful social environment. Since that first Nextdoor post, my husband (Wade Walker) and I have become avid players.

Providing courts in Del Mar will do a service to quite a few people and allow those tennis courts that the community supports with tax dollars to be used by more Del Mar citizens.

Thank you for your consideration,
Becky Walker/ Wade Walker
1440 Oribia Rd.

Del Mar, CA 92014
(619) 884-6095
1 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 5:44 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Pickle Ball Courts
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

It has been brought to my attention that there is a possibility of getting some PB courts for the residents of Del Mar....

There has been an increased interest for the game and no place to play it in Del Mar. We who play have to travel to other communities to enjoy our game, which also means we take our business elsewhere for a sandwich or cup of tea etc before or after the game... With all the Covid problems, places closing, and the economy going “off the rails”, it makes sense to try to help every small business owner with their being able to provide for those of us who try to support our community... If we keep having to leave to enjoy our sport, we will find the other things we need elsewhere as well...
the courts are seldom used for tennis on a routine basis and just sit there wasted .....

The “noise factor” those opposed speak of is really not an issue. Pickle Ball is not a loud, “crowd pleasing” type of sport.

The courts were there when Neighbors bought their homes and other owners in the area have actually built their own courts for their own use. Not a legitimate argument...

Pickle Ball has surpassed tennis in people’s participation and is still growing.....

We’re not asking to get rid of tennis, just share the courts. Progress is part of life and it’s time Del Mar gets with the times..

Thank you,
Kathleen A Jones-Dudchenko
1-(858) 868-3757
Sent from my iPhone
2 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: Monica Meredith <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 6:36 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Tennis courts
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Council,
I am writing to voice my preference for the conversion of the tennis courts to pickle ball courts.

My suggestion is to convert one of the two courts to pickle ball and leave one of the two for tennis.

I feel this is a good compromise and allows both sports to be enjoyed at these public courts.

Best,
Monica Meredith
Monica Meredith
DRE#: 01831776

COMPASS
1555 Camino Del Mar, Suite 317
Del Mar, CA 92014
m: 858.761.1891
3 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: Betsy Dean <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 7:53 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Picketball in DM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I am in total support of adding pickleball courts to the tennis courts in Del Mar! Betsy Royce Dean
261 27th st.

Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail on Android
4 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: Colleen Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2022 8:43 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: RED DOT
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
I just found out that the City Council in Del Mar is considering four pickleball courts at the tennis court location off of Camino Del Mar. I’m writing to voice my support for getting the four Pickleball courts come to fruition.

Since tennis is rarely played there, it’s difficult to understand why our community tennis courts shouldn’t also be used for Pickleball. There are quite a few very interested players that live in Del Mar and have to go all the way to Encinitas to play. We would love to stay within our local area and provide business to our fine retailers before/after play.

With the surge of popularity with both young and old(ish) alike, it would only be a benefit of the city to be able to boast functional pickleball courts. It has and remains to be the fastest growing sport in the US.

Providing courts in Del Mar will do a service to both locals and tourists and allow those tennis courts that the community supports with tax dollars to be used by more Del Mar citizens.

Thank you for your consideration,
Colleen Olson
262 Surfview Court
Del Mar, CA 92014
858-204-0040
5 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: Don Veen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:53 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: ITEM # 13 ON TONIGHTS AGENDA-TENNIS COURT TO PICKLEBALL CONVERSION JAM. 10, 2022
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

OPPOSITION
My name is Don Veen. I reside at 236 21st St. in Del Mar, Calif.

My wife and I have lived here for 35 years. We enjoy the many activities our community offers.

I am writing this in conjunction and agreement with my long time neighbors Terry & Ginger Smith 232 21st St. Del Mar The Proposed idea to convert 1 of the existing Tennis Courts to 4 Pickleball Courts has NOT been thought out, or investigated.

In the last few days, I have done some homework and I have spoken with several friends and business associates, all Pickleball players.
100 % of these people said they would be Against having Public Courts anywhere close to them.

I visited the Bobby Riggs facility in Encinitas and found in Very Busy and VERY NOISY.

There were more people waiting for a court than playing. I brought my Decibel Meter And it read between 70-80 decibels, almost consistently.

It will totally change the environment here.

When an option comes up for Free access, and these Courts is are available, there will be a Huge demand.

Do Not approve this idea. And consider;

1. NOISE—INCREDIBLE.

2. TRAFFIC- There is currently overflow parking from the Tennis and Basketball Courts that regularly uses adjacent Public Streets

3. HANDICAP PARKING

4. HEALTH DEPT. There is 1 single Bathroom.

5. TRASH

6. MAINTENANCE

7. CITY COSTS-Besides new netting8. INSURANCE

9. DEL MAR MUNICIPAL CODES23.08.077 H , 23.08.000 I , 23.08.076 H

10. PILOT PROGRAMS ARE EXTREMELY HARD TO CANCEL

PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS EMAIL

DON VEEN
760.822.1601
1 January 10, 2022 Item 13
1 From: Camilla Rang <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 1:53 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 15, City Council meeting 01/10/2022
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Council,
Welcome to the new year of 2022, the year of the Tiger. Let's be brave tigers this year! I read through Attachment A for the upcoming City Council meeting that suggests we all take a better look at the ridership of the train traffic that serve the public through our area.

It's a good idea to have your numbers in order and know what we are talking about. Some thoughts from me after reading through the data:
a/ Passenger train traffic could easily be reduced to only include one of the serving trains of the Coaster or Surfliner. We do not need both. That would quickly reduce train traffic on the bluff and keep one of systems full. I never understood why we had two systems anyway and which are not ticket compatible. It's really a pain with the two systems. You buy your tickets before hand for the Surfliner, then after a full day downtown or on Coronado when it's time to go home, the Coaster is standing by the platform waiting, but the Surfliner is not coming for another 45 minutes so you just have to stand there and wait. It is irritating and non-intelligent. IMHO, we should stick to the Surfliner that connects us with LA and upwards. The Coaster should be shut down.
b/ It looks like there is a very small percentage of freight going via train, only some 0.5% (?!?). That 0.5% could easily be pushed to one of the other freight systems that are listed.

This way, we would eliminate the heavy freight traffic on the bluff. c/ It doesn't have to come to the choices of No Train or a Tunnel. Trains can deal with inclines. I think we should push for revisiting the option of having the train go along I5 again, especially if we by then only are talking about passenger trains that are not as heavy as freight trains. There are solutions for lighter trains like passenger trains to help them go up steep inclines, such as rail adhesions, rack railways, cable inclines. For the descent, there are 'brake rails' to help with the braking. And in 5-7 years when the train is planned to be relocated from the bluff, there may be new and even better engineered solutions for the inclines. As for our military occasionally needing to use the rails for transport (when did that happen last?), they should voice and chip in for a system that also can pull their possible transports. Has anyone talked to them and involved them in this? Perhaps it's time to seek their input.

Sincerely,
Camilla Rang
1 January 10, 2022 Item 15
2 159 10th Street, Del Mar, CA 92014
Cell: 858 353 1948
2 January 10, 2022 Item 15
1 From: Thomas, David <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:37 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot on “the Train”
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I strongly support further investigation of removing the train from our coast. In addition to all of the other negatives that have been highlighted, equality, environmental, low ridership - I have seen in many other communities the creation of linear parks resulting from removal of rail lines. (Katyâ€™s Trail - Dallas, High Line - New York, and many others that these new parks create new economic vitality to these areas. I firmly believe that if our train track was a park, bike, hiking recreational thoroughfare, that more people would commute to Torrey Pines, Sorrento Mesa, UTC - and further destinations with the advent of electric bikes, then do currently and historically commute on the train. In addition, there would be increased commercial and residential development along these nodes. A linear park extending from Oceanside to Downtown - or the Border, would be seen as a world class amenity for our region and be a model for a new economy, which we are reinventing as a hub for life science, technology, marine biology and increase our already strong basis of tourism.

David Thomas
Principal
LBA Realty | LBA Logistics
858.824.2101 direct | 858.922.2965 cell
vcard | [email protected]
1 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Date: January 10, 2022
To: Del Mar City Council Members
From: Matthew O. Tucker, Executive Director, NCTD
CC: NCTD Board of Directors
SANDAG Board of Directors
Re: City Council Agenda for Proposed Resolution Supporting Efforts to Analyze and Better Understand Long-Term Train Viability I have reviewed the subject agenda item
(https://www.delmar.ca.us/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_01102022-2894) scheduled for consideration at your January 10, 2022 meeting and have provided detailed feedback in the attachment.

In general, the staff report indicates a lack of understanding regarding transportation system planning, operations, and travel demand management. Specifically, passenger rail, public transportation, traveler management demand programs, and roads are part of the comprehensive tools in the transportation system toolbox. The bulk of travel capacity has been invested in our road network with rail, public transportation and traveler demand management programs providing congestion relief, traveler choice, and working to mitigate the need to add road capacity.

Federal, state, and regional transportation plans and funding priorities have evolved to reflect that the era of road expansion will be coming to an end due to environmental, land use, and other considerations. As a result, all levels of government along with San Diego County taxpayers (who voted by a two-thirds majority) are investing in rail, public transportation, and travel demand strategies to support future population growth, economic prosperity, and environmental considerations. A COASTER trainset can carry a maximum of 750 riders. Obviously, the COASTER with only 30 trains per day was not designed to replace or compete with the I-5. The COASTER was designed and developed to complement the Interstate 5 travel corridor and provide congestion relief that voters overwhelmingly support.

The staff report also includes a significant amount of misinformation. The misinformation can be either characterized as intentionally misleading, explicitly inaccurate, and sometimes even salacious. Following are examples. • It is clearly salacious to state that NCTD is providing an “illegal gift of public funds” to BNSF. If there is evidence to support that statement, I request that the City provide such evidence or retract the statement.
• It is intentionally misleading to represent that ridership performance during the global pandemic that caused an unprecedented disruption of the entire economy 1 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Re: City Council Agenda for Proposed Resolution Supporting Efforts to Analyze and Better Understand Long-Term Train Viability
January 10, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

is indicative of future rider demand or in any way illustrative of the viability of the service.
• It is misleading to state that “47% of COASTER riders earn above $100,000 in annual income” without including additional context. The referenced study did not cite individual rider income; it referenced household income. The following information related to COASTER rider demographics to provide context to the public.
o The annual household income of 21.07% of COASTER riders was less than $49,999
o The annual household income of 32.07% of COASTER riders was less than $99,999
o The annual household income of 46.85% of COASTER riders was greater than $100,000
o 43.9% of riders indicated they live in a household with two people o 35.9% of riders indicated they live in a household with three or four people • It is clearly misleading to suggest that COASTER train operations do not support equity while simultaneously stating that autonomous and zero emission personal vehicle technologies will lift all boats.
o Based on market research performed by Hedges & Company in 2018, the average Tesla owner is a 54-year-old white man making over $140,000 annually with no children.
o As indicated previously, the COASTER provides key mobility for a wide range of household incomes.

The proposed staff report and resolution continues to advance a larger misinformation context. Specifically, that the City of Del Mar can disrupt or cause to discontinue a rail line that supports the movement of interstate commerce, intercity passenger rail, and national defense. The misinformation context does not address statutory and contractual obligations that support current operations and assumes that the property will be transferred to the City at no cost, assumes that bluff erosion evaporates, and provides no detail how the trail will be funded.

Furthermore, the staff report is presented as factual information produced by the City’s professional staff rather than the opinions of two council members, which is extremely misleading and a disservice to the public discussion about a topic so important as our transportation infrastructure.

As the Executive Director of NCTD, I believe that it is critical that we provide the public with a full and accurate representation of information. The City staff report clearly does not do this.

Attachment: NCTD responses to City of Del Mar Agenda Item 2 January 10, 2022 Item 15

ATTACHMENT
NCTD’s Response to City of Del Mar’s Proposed Resolution Supporting Efforts to Analyze and Better Understand Long-Term Train Viability

1. The City of Del Mar’s staff report and resolution cite COASTER ridership performance.

NCTD Response
• NCTD agrees that COASTER ridership performance needs to improve. With that said, it is not appropriate to compare COASTER ridership with automobile usage or reference performance during a pandemic as a normal trend. Public transportation was never intended to provide equivalent capacity or usage to the road system. Public transportation is part of the transportation toolbox.
• Current and planned increases in funding of public transportation supports larger economic, environmental, societal, and land use goals. In 2004, San Diego County voted by a two-thirds margin for a comprehensive transportation program of projects that specifically included COASTER service improvements. These investments build out San Diego County’s broader transportation network, consistent with regional and state plans.
• The rail line that was purchased in the early 1990s lacked the infrastructure to support frequencies and travel times required for high-quality passenger train service. • Prior to 2020, the railroad infrastructure, equipment, and services had not been sufficiently improved to support increased frequencies. NCTD offered very limited services with large gaps between trains, which limited making the service viable alternative to automobile travel for many potential riders. • Sufficient projects were completed in 2020 to support increased frequencies.

Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted all facets of daily life and the economy, including the roll-out of improved COASTER services.
• The world continues to be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The current situation is unprecedented and there is little basis for developing estimates in which the region can place significant confidence. NCTD will continue to monitor the short- and long-term trends associated with full recovery from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. The resolution and staff report cites equity as a concern as it relates to investment in rail.

Additionally, both documents cite emerging technologies such as zero emission and autonomous vehicle technology as the future.

NCTD Response
• NCTD supports emerging technologies and is advancing zero emission bus and rail operations projects.
• The staff report and resolution do not attempt to articulate how autonomous and/or zero emission technologies will enhance equity. Based on market research performed by Hedges & Company in 2018, the average Tesla owner is a 54-year-old white man making over $140,000 annually with no children. The vision articulated in the City’s staff report and resolution may very well be viable for the City, but not for San Diego County, the State of California, or the country.
3 January 10, 2022 Item 15

3. The resolution states “that two thirds of COASTER riders earn above the regional median income and 47% earn above $100,000 in annual income.”
NCTD Response
• For additional context, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 2015 OnBoard Transit Passenger Survey captured annual household income and not individual rider income.
o 43.9% of riders indicated they live in a household with two people o 35.9% of riders indicated they live in a household with three or four people. • The SANDAG survey found that:
o The annual household income of 21.07% of COASTER riders was less than $49,999
o The annual household income of 32.07% of COASTER riders was less than $99,999
o The annual household income of 46.85% of COASTER riders was greater than $100,000

4. The resolution and staff report cites the financial costs of infrastructure improvements and “disproportionate benefit or illegal gift of public funds to a single private freight company.” NCTD Response
• NCTD is very disappointed that the City of Del Mar alleges a violation of law in a public document. If the City of Del Mar has such evidence, it should promptly forward such information to the appropriate law enforcement entity. Otherwise, NCTD requests that the City remove this statement from the staff report. • BNSF and Amtrak pay NCTD an annual maintenance fee for their usage of the railroad. This fee escalates on an annual basis tied to a CPI. BNSF and passenger rail operators will benefit from increased capacity to run additional trains. NCTD will receive more money (above the CPI adjustments) from BNSF and Amtrak as train frequencies are increased.
• The government directly funds (creation of highway system using general funds, sales tax, and gas tax) or transfers tax revenues (mortgage tax deduction and equipment depreciation deduction) to create public benefits. o The trucking industry receives a disproportionate benefit as a result of the interstate highway system and is not taxed to cover the added costs of pavement maintenance due to trucks being far heavier than cars. o Tesla Inc. has received a total of $2.5B in subsidies and $465M in loans from various levels of government since 2007. Source:
https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/tesla-inc).

5. The resolution states, “continued advances in autonomous vehicle technology presents substantial potential in the future for improving congestion and efficiency of transportation, transit, and freight on the roads.”
4 January 10, 2022 Item 15
NCTD Response
• In 2013, the State of California passed Senate Bill (SB) 743, which mandates that jurisdictions can no longer use automobile delay – commonly measured by Level of Service (LOS) – in transportation analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The State has issued guidelines calling for the use of a broader measure called Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), which measures the total amount of driving over a given area.
o The COASTER, despite its limited infrastructure and service frequencies, is one of the region’s highest performers with each customer trip reducing vehicle miles traveled by 26.4 miles.
o A freight train can provide the equivalent capacity of 260 to 400 trucks depending on the length of the train consist or if it is a double stacked consist. A single or multiple autonomous and connected truck consist(s) composed of 260+ trucks operating at night is not an advancement in safety or reduction of vehicles miles traveled. Please keep in mind that BNSF moves a significant amount of petroleum and chemicals on the railroad.

6. The resolution states, “the potential alternative use of the tracks as a linear park and multiuse trail can generate substantial social and economic value.” NCTD Response
• BNSF and Amtrak have federal rights to operate that are not subject to local or state requirements.
• The tracks are included in the Strategic Rail Corridor Network that supports national defense.
• It is important to note conversion of an active rail line to a trail only occurs when it is no longer economically feasible to operate freight or passenger and the Surface Transportation Board approves the abandonment. The San Diego and Escondido Subdivisions do not meet the criteria for abandonment and in fact, BNSF is advancing plans to increase the frequencies of freight and the region is advancing plans to increase passenger/commuter rail.
• The region has developed plans to relocate the tracks from the bluffs to a tunnel due to the erosion of the bluffs. Why would the City or region decide to purchase the property from NCTD and construct a linear park and multi-use trail on property that it alleges is eroding?
• Conversion of rail tracks to trails does not singularly create an economic impact. For example, the High Line in New York (cited in the City staff report) was significantly benefitted by intense density coupled with frequent transit within walking distance. These two factors positively impacted property values and do not exist in the Del Mar area. • NCTD is unaware of any plans by the City of Del Mar to intensify commercial and retail development. NCTD would gladly partner to restore train operations at the Del Mar Train Station and support other improvements to create a mobility hub. 5 January 10, 2022 Item 15
For Agenda Item: 15. Proposed Resolution
Supporting Efforts to Analyze and Better
Understand the Long-Term Train Viability
Mark Handzel
100 12th Street
1 1 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Agenda

1. NCTD

2. AMTRAK

3. FREIGHT

4. MARINE 5

5. STRATEGIC CORRIDOR – National Defense

6. TROLLEY

7. RECOMMENDATIONS - OPINION
2 2 January 10, 2022 Item 15
NCTD Passengers, Revenue, and Operating
Costs – excludes Capital costs
(thousands) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Passengers 1,642 1,556 1,455 1,433 1,409 944
Revenue $7,401 $6,878 $6,453 $5,453 $5,674 $4,334
Operating Costs $20,212 $17,386 $18,653 $17,049 $19,969 $21,211 Operating Gain or (Loss) ($12,811) ($10,508) ($12,200) ($11,596) ($14,295) ($16,877) Coaster Ridership, Revenue, and Operating Costs
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Passengers per day 4499 4263 3986 3926 3860 2,586
Revenue per passenger $4.51 $4.42 $4.44 $3.81 $4.03 $4.59 Cost per passenger $12.32 $11.17 $12.82 $11.90 $14.18 $22.47 Gain or loss per passenger ($7.81) ($6.75) ($8.38) ($8.09) ($10.15) ($17.88) Coaster Revenue and Cost per Passenger
3 3 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Coaster Social Equity and White-Collar Commuters
Rank City Income
4 Del Mar $108.6k
7 Encinitas $100.7k
8 Solana Beach $100.4k
11 Carlsbad $97.1k
37 Oceanside $58.9k
S.D. median $66.5K
• Coaster does not address transportation social
equity
• 4 out of 5 coastal cities ranked in top 11 for income in SD County
• Median San Diego income is $66.5k.
• Commuter rail is facing an uncertain future
• The greatest percentage of Coaster riders were 9-to-5 white-collar suburbanites from northern SD coastal cities to the Sorrento Valley station • The pandemic-fueled shift to remote work is creating new financial and logistical challenges for transit systems that were built around a daily, 9-to-5 commuting structure.
4 4 January 10, 2022 Item 15
NCTD
• Currently, the theoretical top speeds on the San Diego segment are 90 mph for passenger trains and 60 mph for freight trains.
• The new Siemens diesel locomotives purchased by NCTD are capable of up to 125 mph, but their speed is limited by the condition of the tracks and equipment. • Together the Del Mar and Miramar tunnels would reduce the travel time between Oceanside and San Diego, including stops at all the stations on the route, from the present 56 minutes to 39 minutes, a 17-minute difference. • Realignment of the tracks would allow top speeds of 110 mph. • $6 B cost estimates for the construction of the 2.5 mile Del Mar tunnel and the 2.5 mile University City tunnel
5 5 January 10, 2022 Item 15
List of busiest AMTRAK Stations in the US
Rank Station City State 2017 2018 2019 2020
2019 -
2020
Change
1 Penn Station New York City NY 10,397,729 10,132,025 10,811,323 5,432,851 -49.75% 2 Wash. Union Washington DC 5,225,460 5,197,237 5,207,223 2,606,059 -49.95% 3 30th Street Philadelphia PA 4,411,662 4,471,992 4,503,055 2,261,194 -49.79% 4 Chicago Union Chicago IL 3,388,051 3,388,307 3,331,527 1,688,452 -49.32% 5 South Station Boston MA 1,567,627 1,553,953 1,585,216 793,113 -49.97% 6 Union Station Los Angeles CA 1,716,392 1,717,405 1,413,006 708,925 -50.46% 7 Sacramento Sacramento CA 1,073,584 1,089,223 1,100,550 565,196 -48.64% 8 Penn Station Baltimore MD 1,063,628 1,041,232 1,043,542 538,330 -48.41% 9 Albany Rensselaer NY 803,348 800,368 806,960 450,965 -44.12% 10 Union Station New Haven CT 627,065 697,603 778,534 425,723 -45.32% 6 6 January 10, 2022 Item 15
AMTRAK California - Top pairs by Revenue - 2019
CA Top city pairs - Ridership Miles

1. Los Angeles - San Diego 128

2. Emeryville – Sacramento 85

3. Los Angeles - SD Old Town 125

4. Los Angeles - Solana Beach 102

5. Richmond - Sacramento 77

6. Oakland - Sacramento 90

7. Los Angeles - Oceanside 87

8. Martinez – Fresno 58

9. Bakersfield – Fresno 110

10. Irvine - Los Angeles 45
CA Top city pairs - Revenue Miles

1. Los Angeles - San Diego 128

2. Los Angeles - Chicago, IL 2728

3. Emeryville - Chicago, IL 2438

4. Los Angeles - SD Old Town 125

5. Los Angeles - Seattle, WA 1377

6. Los Angeles - Solana Beach 102

7. Emeryville - Sacramento 85

8. Los Angeles - Oceanside 87

9. Oakland - Sacramento 90

10. Richmond - Sacramento 77
2017 Ridership 2018 Ridership 2019 Ridership
Stations Total Per Day Total Per Day Total Per Day
San Diego 680,114 1,863 665,967 1,825 654,908 1,794
SD Old Town 287,480 788 349,389 957 369,674 1,013
SD Sorrento Valley 23,776 65 27,956 77 599 2
Solana Beach 370,064 1,014 377,061 1,033 370,845 1,016 7 7 January 10, 2022 Item 15
AMTRAK Performance
• Ridership had plateaued at approximately 4K per day. Ridership fell by 50% in 2020
• In 2019, Surfliners averaged only 44 mph and almost 3 hours between San Diego and Los Angeles, compared to the 1976 average of 49 mph. • The on-time performance of the Pacific Surfliner was 74.7% in 2018 and 71.5% in 2019.
8 8 January 10, 2022 Item 15
AMTRAK Summary
• Amtrak carried only 0.1 percent of all passenger travel in the United States.
• Higher speed rail lines require higher infrastructure costs to build and maintain to extremely precise and costly standards.
• Rail agencies do not include capital costs (depreciation), it only counts operations and maintenance costs against the revenues
9 9 January 10, 2022 Item 15
2012 San Diego Domestic Inbound and Outbound
Freight Percentage by Mode of Transportation
88%
5% 5% 2% 0% 0%
86%
7%
2% 2% 1% 2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Truck Multiple Modes &
Mail
Pipeline Rail Air Water
Inbound Outbound
10 10 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Summary of Freight Flows through the Region’s
Gateways by Modal Volume: 2050 Forecast
The influence on SD from
the growth in international
intermodal rail service is
indirect for four reasons:

1. Carload capacity is primarily limited by the capacity of the rail yards.

2. There currently is no significant cross border intermodal rail service between Baja California and the US

3. The Port of San Diego is not a large container port that requires intermodal rail service.

4. Relatively close proximity of the Maquiladoras in Baja California make rail competing with trucks challenging. 11 11 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Summary of Freight Flows Domestically within
the Region in Volume: 2050 Forecast
12 12 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Sharing Freight and Passenger Tracks
• The general design criteria for vertical grades or the slope of the tracks on main freight lines are generally 1 percent or less • Tunnels are needed because of this grade requirement for freight • Track maintenance cost
• Higher speed trains increase maintenance cost per mile by ~20% • Increasing the freight tonnage also increases the maintenance cost per mile of track by greater than 20%
• Sharing freight and passenger modes adds difficulties and cost • `
13 13 January 10, 2022 Item 15
National Defense
• Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET)
• STRACNET is a 33,000-mile interconnected network of rail corridors (not actual rail lines) important to national defense
• Purpose to identify defense rail requirements; assure consideration for national defense in civil railroad policy, plans, standards, and programs; and gain support and responsiveness for defense rail line requirements.
• The Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET)
• System of public highways that is a key deterrent in United States strategic policy. • Most large military convoys use the Strategic Highway Network. • STRAHNET roadways are those which would be used for the rapid mobilization and deployment of armed forces in the event of war or peacekeeping activity. • I-5, I-805, I-15, I-8, etc., are all part of interstate STRAHNET with either direct or additional designated STRAHNET connectors to all the San Diego military installations. • San Francisco and Boston recently had their downtown rail lines removed from

STRACNET
14 14 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Marine 5 – M5
• August 2021, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) announced M-5 Coastal Connector (California, Oregon, Washington) • Project for barges between Bellingham, Washington; Southern Oregon; and San Diego, California.
• Reduces truck traffic along Interstate 5.
• Moving freight by ocean tends to be less carbon-intense than by truck or rail • Barges could be a least-cost method for moving goods. • Rail freight and domestic sea freight competing for valuable land needed for rail terminal or seaport terminal expansion. The port is evaluating two options:

1. Optimizing internal terminal cargo operations so that more rail traffic can be accommodated

2. Develop Marine Highway connections to the terminal.
15 15 January 10, 2022 Item 15
San Diego Trolley
• Why spend money on high-speed rail when urban transit will serve more trips more cost-efficiently? (e.g., most travel is local) • The Trolley is already electrified
• Tolley duplicates 11 miles of Coaster’s route from University City to Santa Fe station
• Maximum speed of Trolley is 55 MPH – this is current speed of Coaster and AMTRAK
• The number of Trolley riders in one day are almost equal to the number of riders on each the NCTD and AMTRAK for a year.
• The Trolley promotes social transportation equity
• Design criteria for vertical grades or the slope of the Trolley tracks is 4.3 % • This difference alone has a significant impact on where tracks can be located and whether deep tunnels are required to satisfy these vertical grade requirements. 16 16 January 10, 2022 Item 15
San Diego MTS Passengers by Fiscal Year and Route Type
17 17 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Evaluation of Transportation Alternatives
Corridor Cars High-Speed
Length (miles) Criteria Current Future Buses Airplanes Trains Fast Yes Yes No No On longer Corridor
0 - 200 Ecological No Yes Yes No Yes
Convenient Yes Yes To Center City No To Center City
Low Cost Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Fast No No No Yes Yes
200 - 600 Ecological No Yes Yes No Yes
Convenient Yes Yes To Center City No To Center City
Low Cost No Yes No No No
Fast No No No Yes No
600 + Ecological No Yes Yes Relatively Yes
Convenient Yes Yes To Center City No To Center City
Low Cost No No No Yes No
18 18 January 10, 2022 Item 15
Recommended Priorities
• Carbon Reduction – Transportation is responsible for 30% of CO2 emissions. • Moving to electric cars is the low hanging fruit
• Invest in charging stations
• Congestion and Mass Transit
• Big and small electric buses
• Level 4 (fixed route) autonomous vans and buses using priority lanes • Current operating cost is 70% labor. Driver more expensive than maintenance, fuel, etc. • Very flexible for adding and changing routes and low upfront infrastructure costs • Socially equitable
• Expand the Trolley (already electric)
• Serves the most passengers and SD geography
• Socially equitable
• Freight – Marine 5
19 19 January 10, 2022 Item 15
New Trolley Extension in University City
20 20 January 10, 2022 Item 15
New Trolley Extension in Del Mar
21 21 January 10, 2022 Item 15
1 From: Ann Feeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:57 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 15
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
The ridership of all trains and mass transit in general is down significantly due to COVID. Also, the fact that the trains do not run often enough is a major reason for low ridership. I wanted to go to a SANDAG meeting downtown 2 years ago, and although I could get a train down at a good time, there was no train at all for the return trip at a convenient time, so I had to drive down. We are in a climate crisis, and we need to support and expand ridership of all mass transit, which will be facilitated by having trains running more often. Most people do not have EV cars, so must of the traffic on the highways is gas-powered cars. Certainly from an equity point of view, most low income San Diegans cannot afford an EV, and may well have an older car that pollutes a lot more than newer cars.

I am not clear what analysis the councilmembers are proposing that Del Mar support. I hope they are not proposing that Del Mar pay for an analysis, and I doubt that NCTD is paying for one. Let’s support NCTD, and other transit groups.

Thank you
Ann Feeney
Rimini Rd.
1 January 10, 2022 Item 15
City Council Agenda Questions
January 10, 2022
Item 2: Approval of Minutes: December 7, 2021 Special Meetings; December 13, 2021 Regular and Special Meetings

1. The December 7, 2021 minutes for Item 2 say council moved to "...REVIEW THE

OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO ANNUAL COMMITTEE

CHAIR TRAINING, REVISIONS TO HANDOUTS FOR COMMITTEE OFFICERS, AND THE REVISED CITIZEN INTEREST FORM." Is that right? Did we approve this item or just decide to review?
The Council action was to approve not review the operational recommendations.

As such, a correction is needed to the December 7, 2021 Special Meeting Minutes for the last motion during item 2 as shown below. Staff will note this correction before the Consent Calendar is considered this evening.

IT WAS MOVED BY DEPUTY MAYOR WORDEN, SECONDED BY

COUNCILMEMBER MARTINEZ TO REVIEW APPROVE THE OPERATIONAL

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO ANNUAL COMMITTEE CHAIR

TRAINING, REVISIONS TO HANDOUTS FOR COMMITTEE OFFICERS, AND THE REVISED CITIZEN INTEREST FORM. (VOTE 5-0)
Item 6: Authorization to Request Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Technical Assistance via the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program (BRIC) Related to Design of a Living Levee Conceptual Plan

1. Is the 22nd Agricultural District engaged with the City on the FEMA technical assistance levee application?
A copy of the staff report was shared with Dustin Fuller at 22ndDAA as an FYI. The FEMA technical assistance that is being sought will help the City prepare a conceptual plan for a living levee, which is already a task in an existing contract. The question of whether or not the levee will need to be on both sides of the river for flood management purposes is expected to be confirmed in this conceptual design phase. Since we are still at an exploratory stage no commitments to a project have been made. The conceptual plan will help with the future decision of whether or not to pursue a levee project.

2. When will the levee project become a CEQA project?
CEQA will be triggered at the point of decision of whether or not to pursue a levee project.
1 January 10, 2022 Items 2,6,10,12
Item 10: Resolution Authorizing the Submittal and Processing of an Application for the Fiscal Years 2022-2023 through 2026-2027 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding for Reconstruction of Sidewalks, Walkways, and Pedestrian Ramps to Meet ADA Compliance

1. Regarding the CDBG grant application, is the $20k the city needs to come up with already in the budget?
No, the $20,000 in proposed City funding is not currently included in the budget. If the City’s CDBG funding request is approved by the County, staff will bring a budget adjustment to the City Council for consideration. Please keep in mind that that only $20,000 of the total project cost will come from the City’s General Fund. $80,000 will be funded through the CDBG.

Item 12: Continuation of Committee Efficiencies Taskforce Report and Recommendations

1. The staff report indicates staff will be preparing templates for the work plans--do we have that?
The Council is considering changes to the Advisory Committee work plan process as part of the proposed changes to the Standard Operating Principles (Recommended Action #2) as part of this agenda item. The proposed work plan process includes Advisory Committees submitting an annual work plan, including requests for financial and staff resources, to the City Council for approval each year.

If the Standard Operating Principles and revised work plan process are approved this evening, staff will finalize a work plan template and distribute it to the Advisory Committees and Council liaisons shortly thereafter.
2 January 10, 2022 Items 2,6,10,12

Del Mar City CouncilJanuary 10, 2022

Del Mar City Council
January 10, 2022