Del Mar City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Del Mar City Hall – Via Teleconference Only
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
January 25, 2022 City Council Special Meeting
INFORMATION RECEIVED
AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA
WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 From: Laura DeMarco <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 10:23 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot supporting geological report to address 1/25 closed session items: 1) STB petition and 2) NCTD fence liabilities
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 Council Members and Staff,
The city of Del Mar needs a thorough geotechnical inspection of NCTD’s right of way on Del Mar’s eroding bluffs to provide safer and less damaging alternatives to the fencing approved at NCTD’s January 20 board meeting as well as to limit the city’s liability.
The public and the city of Del Mar need to be protected from NCTD’s fencing project that potentially creates a
1.5-mile long geological “time bomb” that threatens the safety of train passengers and crews as well as crowds of beachgoers. Leighton’s cursory 2-page geotechnical report provided by NCTD is insufficient and too full of disclaimers to substantiate its conclusion that the fencing will not cause more bluff erosion.
Since NCTD stated at the board meeting that Del Mar’s geotechnical expert would be allowed to inspect the property, we urge you to follow through with an inspection and report. It will show that NCTD’s proposed installation of two 1.5-mile long, 6-ft high, heavy chain-link fences on or near the vulnerable edges of Del Mar’s eroding sandstone bluffs accelerates their erosion and destabilizes them. This fencing requires drilling 1,400 3-ft-deep x 1-ft-wide post holes and adding over 600,000 lbs. of weight from heavy cement footings and fencing. It creates 1,400 new stress points and sources of water intrusion on the fragile bluffs that are so unstable that there have already been 8 large bluff failures like the one which killed three family members in Encinitas in 2019.
The report will likely prohibit fencing on the seaward side of the lower bluff because it is too damaging to one of the most unstable sections of the bluff. Since the narrow seaward side of the lower bluff is already dangerously eroding at a long-term average of 6 inches/year, bluff retreat would be 10 feet in 20 years and 15 feet in 30 years so there is no room for any fencing.
Ignoring warnings from geologists and engineers about a bluff’s unsafe condition is what led to the catastrophic Encinitas tragedy. The victims’ families filed suit against the city of Encinitas and the state of California which tried to invoke Gov. Code 831.2 barring liability for a “natural condition” of “unimproved public property.” However, a judge refused to dismiss the case against them so it is proceeding to a jury trial with potential claims far exceeding $10M for the three victims.
Here are the relevant excerpts from the Encinitas lawsuit that applies to NCTD’s fencing, a man-made installation that increases the risk of bluff failure and, consequently, potential liability for any public body that approves it:
1 January 25, 2022 Items III-A,B
2 “Defendants state of California and city of Encinitas were repeatedly warned by scientists and engineers of these dangers, and were explicitly told what was needed to mitigate the risks of block falls and cliff collapse. These defendants, however, failed to do even the bare minimum to keep families and beach-goers safe, and instead allowed man-made changes to increase the instability and risk of collapse over the years. By doing so, defendants made the risk of collapse inevitable and created a time bomb for the beach-going public. The only question was when it would occur and who would be injured or killed.” Thus, the geological report will confirm that any modifications to NCTD’s proposed fencing is a necessity which limits Del Mar’s potential liability to future claims by those killed or injured by bluff slides and train strikes.
The report will determine what type and location is the least damaging long-term, especially with the additional stresses of the expected 6.5-6.9 earthquake from the nearby Rose Canyon Fault. Note that once installed, the fencing should not be removed as it creates a permanent source of destabilizing water intrusion that causes bluff slides.
Look at the limited fencing that geotechnical engineers permit at the nearby Torrey Pines State Natural Preserve which also has dangerously unstable sandstone bluffs. Note there are no damaging 6-ft high, heavy chain link fences requiring drilling thousands of 3-ft deep and 1-ft wide post holes. As shown below, the permitted fences are short, light weight and not visually intrusive.
2 January 25, 2022 Items III-A,B
3 3 January 25, 2022 Items III-A,B
4 In summary, Del Mar’s geotechnical report will be useful in substantially modifying NCTD’s damaging fencing project which endangers the lives of hundreds of innocent train passengers traveling along Del Mar’s crumbling bluffs and families enjoying the popular beach below. In addition, the report helps protect the city of Del Mar from long-term liability, especially when the property reverts back to city ownership after the train tracks are moved off the bluff.
Thanks,
Laura
4 January 25, 2022 Items III-A,B
1 From: Laura DeMarco <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 1:39 PM
To: Dwight Worden; Terry Gaasterland; David Druker; Dan Quirk; Tracy Martinez; Ashley Jones
Cc: City Clerk Mail Box; Deborah Lee; Karl Schwing; Udo Wahn Subject: Re: Red dot supporting geological report to address 1/25 closed session items: 1) STB petition and 2) NCTD fence liabilities
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 Members and Staff,
To follow up on a recipient’s request for more detail on the Encinitas bluff side lawsuit, following are the citations:
News report with excerpts of court ruling:
https://thecoastnews.com/judge-tosses-citys-objection-in-grandview-bluff-collapse-lawsuit/ Lawsuit against Encinitas and state:
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/cliffcollapse.pdf It would be prudent for the city of Del Mar to spend a few thousand dollars for a geotechnical study to save the city millions in long-term liability.
Del Mar’s environmental report will also help the Coastal Commission to gain jurisdiction in state court to enforce CEQA for a project on land owned by a state-created transit district, NCTD, that is using state grant funds requiring following CA laws (including CEQA) to construct fencing. This triggers the Eel River California Supreme Court precedent for “self governance” that cannot be preempted by NCTD’s STB petition:
https://www.ceqadevelopments.com/2017/07/31/california-supreme-court-holds-ceqa-applies-to-state-entitysrailroad-project-on-state-owned-rail-line-as-act-of-self-governance-not-regulation-that-woul/ Thanks,
Laura
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 25, 2022, at 11:46 AM, Laura DeMarco <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Council Members and Staff,
1 January 25, 2022 Items III - A,B
2 The city of Del Mar needs a thorough geotechnical inspection of NCTD’s right of way on Del Mar’s eroding bluffs to provide safer and less damaging alternatives to the fencing approved at NCTD’s January 20 board meeting as well as to limit the city’s liability.
The public and the city of Del Mar need to be protected from NCTD’s fencing project that potentially creates a 1.5-mile long geological “time bomb” that threatens the safety of train passengers and crews as well as crowds of beachgoers. Leighton’s cursory 2-page geotechnical report provided by NCTD is insufficient and too full of disclaimers to substantiate its conclusion that the fencing will not cause more bluff erosion.
Since NCTD stated at the board meeting that Del Mar’s geotechnical expert would be allowed to inspect the property, we urge you to follow through with an inspection and report. It will show that NCTD’s proposed installation of two 1.5-mile long, 6-ft high, heavy chain-link fences on or near the vulnerable edges of Del Mar’s eroding sandstone bluffs accelerates their erosion and destabilizes them. This fencing requires drilling 1,400 3-ft-deep x 1-ft-wide post holes and adding over 600,000 lbs. of weight from heavy cement footings and fencing. It creates 1,400 new stress points and sources of water intrusion on the fragile bluffs that are so unstable that there have already been 8 large bluff failures like the one which killed three family members in Encinitas in 2019.
The report will likely prohibit fencing on the seaward side of the lower bluff because it is too damaging to one of the most unstable sections of the bluff. Since the narrow seaward side of the lower bluff is already dangerously eroding at a long-term average of 6 inches/year, bluff retreat would be 10 feet in 20 years and 15 feet in 30 years so there is no room for any fencing.
Ignoring warnings from geologists and engineers about a bluff’s unsafe condition is what led to the catastrophic Encinitas tragedy. The victims’ families filed suit against the city of Encinitas and the state of California which tried to invoke Gov. Code 831.2 barring liability for a “natural condition” of “unimproved public property.” However, a judge refused to dismiss the case against them so it is proceeding to a jury trial with potential claims far exceeding $10M for the three victims.
Here are the relevant excerpts from the Encinitas lawsuit that applies to NCTD’s fencing, a manmade installation that increases the risk of bluff failure and, consequently, potential liability for any public body that approves it:
“Defendants state of California and city of Encinitas were repeatedly warned by scientists and engineers of these dangers, and were explicitly told what was needed to mitigate the risks of block falls and cliff collapse. These defendants, however, failed to do even the bare minimum to keep families and beach-goers safe, and instead allowed man-made changes to increase the instability and risk of collapse over the years. By doing so, defendants made the risk of collapse inevitable and created a time bomb for the beach-going public. The only question was when it would occur and who would be injured or killed.” 2 January 25, 2022 Items III - A,B
3 Thus, the geological report will confirm that any modifications to NCTD’s proposed fencing is a necessity which limits Del Mar’s potential liability to future claims by those killed or injured by bluff slides and train strikes.
The report will determine what type and location is the least damaging long-term, especially with the additional stresses of the expected 6.5-6.9 earthquake from the nearby Rose Canyon Fault.
Note that once installed, the fencing should not be removed as it creates a permanent source of destabilizing water intrusion that causes bluff slides.
Look at the limited fencing that geotechnical engineers permit at the nearby Torrey Pines State Natural Preserve which also has dangerously unstable sandstone bluffs. Note there are no damaging 6-ft high, heavy chain link fences requiring drilling thousands of 3-ft deep and 1-ft wide post holes. As shown below, the permitted fences are short, light weight and not visually intrusive.
3 January 25, 2022 Items III - A,B
4 4 January 25, 2022 Items III - A,B
5 In summary, Del Mar’s geotechnical report will be useful in substantially modifying NCTD’s damaging fencing project which endangers the lives of hundreds of innocent train passengers traveling along Del Mar’s crumbling bluffs and families enjoying the popular beach below. In addition, the report helps protect the city of Del Mar from long-term liability, especially when the property reverts back to city ownership after the train tracks are moved off the bluff.
Thanks,
Laura DeMarco
5 January 25, 2022 Items III - A,B
1 From: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: FW: January 24, 2022 Meeting: Request for Council to fund Del Mar Bluff Geotechnical Consulting Report
Attachments: DM Council Bluff engineering consultant-PR Stevens-24Jan2022.docx From: Payson Stevens <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 8:09 AM
To: Dwight Worden <[email protected]>; David Druker <[email protected]>; Terry Gaasterland <[email protected]>; DeMarco/Del Mar Park, Laura <[email protected]>; Tracy Martinez <[email protected]>; Dan Quirk <[email protected]>; Ashley Jones <[email protected]> Cc: Drew Cady <[email protected]>; Weiss, Shirli <[email protected]>; Karen Lare <[email protected]>; Laura Schaefer Biz <[email protected]>; Al Tarkington <[email protected]>; Johnkstahl <[email protected]>; Camilla Rang <[email protected]> Subject: January 24, 2022 Meeting: Request for Council to fund Del Mar Bluff Geotechnical Consulting Report 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.
Attached and below is my request as part of the Public Record:
24 January 2022
Del Mar City Council Members:
Dwight Worden
Tracy Martinez
Dave Druker
Terry Gaasterland
Dan Quirk
Having presented three times to the California Coastal Commission, twice to SANDAG and twice to NCTD at public hearings, I add my voice to so many in the community who urge our Council to fund the geotechnical analysis of the impacts of NTCD’s proposed fencing.
NCTD’s egregious disregard of both the California Coastal Commission and the California Attorney General’s letter’s last week, is a slap in the face to all of California’s citizens. We understand the hardball game NTCD is playing and need to have Del Mar’s engineering pieces in place for any legal challenge including by CEQA.
Some council members are concerned about the engineering consulting costs but they are minimal compared to the irreparable impacts to the bluffs, our access being denied, the impact on tourism, and the incredible disregard/pre-empting of California environmental law. 1 January 25, 2022 Item III-B
2 Perhaps the Del Mar and larger San Diego community can also contribute for the consulting fees with a crowd-funding effort. I’m sure many will step and donate, and it will further show the level of commitment of Del Mar and others to protect our natural heritage.
There must be absolute opposition to the fences on the upper bluff and only, if needed, minimal fence construction on the lower bluffs. Enough evidence has been presented in public hearings that only areas like 13-15th St and Coast Boulevard, where most of the fatalities have occurred, where a minimal barrier is needed. The rest of the bluff and beach access must be open.
We know from the Save Del Mar Bluffs Science Report that Terry Gaasterland and I wrote the excessive nature of the SANDAG and NCTD proposed engineering and the multiple coastal bluff geology questions that need answering and an EIR.
Please stand strong and united against this attempt to desecrate our bluffs and beaches.
This is on your watch and your legacy.
Respectfully,
Payson R. Stevens
411 7th Street
Del Mar, CA 92014
--
Payson R. Stevens
www.paysonrstevens.com
Artwork & Paintings
VideoTonePoems III DVD
VideoTonePoems II DVD
VideoTonePoems I DVD
Indian National Park/Friends of GHNP
The World In You
You In The World
Meshuggenary
2 January 25, 2022 Item III-B
24 January 2022
Del Mar City Council Members:
Dwight Worden
Tracy Martinez
Dave Druker
Terry Gaasterland
Dan Quirk
Having presented three times to the California Coastal Commission, twice to SANDAG and twice to NCTD at public hearings, I add my voice to so many in the community who urge our Council to fund the geotechnical analysis of the impacts of NTCD’s proposed fencing.
NCTD’s egregious disregard of both the California Coastal Commission and the California Attorney General’s letter’s last week, is a slap in the face to all of California’s citizens. We understand the hardball game NTCD is playing and need to have Del Mar’s engineering pieces in place for any legal challenge including by CEQA.
Some council members are concerned about the engineering consulting costs but they are minimal compared to the irreparable impacts to the bluffs, our access being denied, the impact on tourism, and the incredible disregard/pre-empting California environmental law.
Perhaps the Del Mar and larger San Diego community can also contribute for the consulting fees with a crowd-funding effort. I’m sure many will step and donate, and it will further show the level of commitment of Del Mar and others to protect our natural heritage.
There must be absolute opposition to the fences on the upper bluff and only, if needed, minimal fence construction on the lower bluffs. Enough evidence has been presented in public hearings that only areas like 13-15th St and Coast Boulevard, where most of the fatalities have occurred, where a minimal barrier is needed. The rest of the bluff and beach access must be open.
We know from the Save Del Mar Bluffs Science Report that Terry Gaasterland and I wrote the excessive nature of the SANDAG and NCTD proposed engineering and the multiple coastal bluff geology questions that need answering and an EIR.
Please stand strong and united against this attempt to desecrate our bluffs and beaches.
This is on your watch and your legacy.
Respectfully,
Payson R. Stevens
411 7th Street
Del Mar, CA 92014
3 January 25, 2022 Item III-B