Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda
Del Mar Town Hall
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
April 17, 2023 City Council Meeting
INFORMATION RECEIVED
AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA
WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 Melinda Gould
From: Udo Wahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 3:57 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot April 17th Council meeting- RE: WildCoast 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 City Council Members:
WildCoast is an international profit team that seeks to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems. Their headquarters is in Del Mar, on Jimmy Durante blvd.
I have participated in a number of lagoon restoration projects with them here in Del Mar in an effort to increase Blue Carbon capture.
In addition they have projects in Mexico involving mangrove restoration among other things and MPA surveillance along the CA coast.
It is my hope that the City will approve their use of City meeting places by adding them to the non profit list of users.
Thank you!
Aloha!
Udo
Udo Wahn M.D.
Stratford court
1 April 17, 2023 Item - Public Oral Communications
1 Melinda Gould
From: Sloan Gobar <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 12:01 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: April 17, 2023, City Council Meeting; PUBLIC COMMENT - Affordable Housing & the Del Mar North Bluff
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.
Re: April 17, 2023, City Council Meeng; PUBLIC COMMENT – Affordable Housing & the Del Mar North Bluff Good aernoon –
My name is Spencer Gobar. I am a third generaon Southern CA nave and have been blessed to call Solana Beach home since 1990. My grandfather, Papa Neal, has resided on 19th Street in Del Mar for over 40 years, and I truly believe his longevity is partly due to the quality of life that north county coastal offers its residents.
Coming from a family of aorneys, real estate brokers, educators, and nature enthusiasts, it seems only fing that I would find myself standing here in front of you today to speak on behalf of that which cannot speak for itself – Mother Nature, and more specifically, our iconic North Bluff above Del Mar Dog Beach.
In 2018, with the encouragement of my father, I founded Save Our Bluff – San Diego (SOB SD). With the support and involvement of countless friends, neighbors, family, and even total strangers, SOB SD worked relessly alongside other locals and environmental groups to prevent the Del Mar Resort from being built. Our grassroots movement proved successful in February 2020 when Del Mar residents voted No on Measure G and rejected Zephyr’s plans for a massive commercial project on the North Bluff.
Fast forward to 2023, Del Mar finds itself under pressure from the State to meet affordable housing requirements and of course the bluff is at the top of the list as a potenal locaon. Affordable housing is a necessity, there is no queson about that, however, what exactly is “affordable” about oceanfront, raw land just north of Bill Gates’s $43 million estate, which he purchased shortly aer we blocked Measure G in 2020?
I find the soluon to Del Mar’s problem to be quite simple:
1. Work with the State of CA to build the necessary affordable housing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds. o +50% to meet long term future needs.
2. Work with the City of Solana Beach to protect the Del Mar North Bluff (for good) by acquiring the land and establishing a community park.
It is me for Del Mar to rise to the occasion and serve as an example for all other cies feeling the same pressure from the State. The risks of coastal development are too high to look the other way.
Del Mar once stood behind the moo, “Keep Greenery in the Scenery”.
Who will stand for that today and put a stop to the abusive overdevelopment of our coastline? Kindly,
1 April 17, 2023 Item - Public Oral Communications
2 Spencer Sloan Gobar
Founder | Save Our Bluff - San Diego
[email protected] | www.saveourbluffsd.com
2 April 17, 2023 Item - Public Oral Communications
To: Del Mar City Council
From: Jill Gartman
Date: April 14, 2023
Re: Agenda Item #1, April 17, 2023 City Council Meeting Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:
Thank you Mayor Martinez for the agenda item allowing WILDCOAST to share with council and our community the important work being done by WILDCOAST in Del Mar and along the coast of California extending into Baja and parts of mainland Mexico.
I joined the WILDCOAST board in 2021 at the encouragement of long time WILDCOAST Board Member Doug Sheres, Former Mayor of Solana Beach. I am honored to be a part of the WILDCOAST Board, and I am truly impressed by the dedication and passion of the WILDCOAST team. WILDCOAST tackles environmental issues often overlooked by other NGOs.
Last year when WILDCOAST was on the council agenda to be added to the list of Del Mar non-profits, a handful of residents submitted red dot letters asking council to decline the approval of adding WILDCOAST to the list. I was disheartened to see such an attack on a non-profit organization that is directly benefitting Del Mar and far beyond.
If I had known this was happening at the time, I would have spoken at the meeting to help clear up any confusion. The form red dot letter that was created and circulated to residents mischaracterized a homepage quote that WILDCOAST “…addresses climate change through natural solutions” The form letter inferred that natural climate solutions translates to the California Coastal Commission’s managed retreat agenda. WILDCOAST has no stake in the sea level rise issues facing coastal communities like Del Mar and does not advocate for managed retreat. WILDCOAST spends its efforts working with communities not against them.
1 April 17, 2023 Item 01
An example of the kind of natural climate solutions being undertaken by WILDCOAST is their initiative to work with local communities to plant mangrove trees along the coast in Baja.
Mangroves are particularly effective at carbon sequestration because they have the ability to store large amounts of carbon in their biomass and in the soil beneath them. Some studies have shown that mangrove soils can contain up to five times more carbon per unit area than tropical rainforests. It makes sense to restore mangroves as a natural way to fight climate change.
I hope today’s presentation will help clear up any misinformation about WILDCOAST. If any lingering concerns remain, please feel free to call or email me to talk about it.
Jill Gartman
Pine Needles Dr
Lagoon Committee Chair
WILDCOAST Board Member
2 April 17, 2023 Item 01
1 Melinda Gould
From: Camilla Rang <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 3:57 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 10 "Coastal Connections Planning Study Final Report", City Council meeting
04.17.23 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 City Council,
I have read through the SANDAG Planning Study and results. I whole heartedly support the City Council in approving going forward with the North-South trail and also the underpass at 8th Street. However, I do not support including an at-grade at 11th street as we now know that any at-grade crossing will come with horns and bells. As much as I for selfish reason would love to have a crossing at 11th street, the houses at that location are simply too close to the rail road. All the alarms would destroy the lives of the people living there and I cannot support doing that to my fellow neighbors. If an at-grade were to be, it would only be possible at 8th street, where the houses are slightly more distanced from the rail road, but even then it may be too loud.
I think most of us had an at-grade in mind when this project first started to become reality, but we were not at that time aware of the strict alarm regulations for incoming trains.
Especially not since one clearly can hear the bells from 15th street while at 11th street. If there is no way around the alarms for an at-grade, my personal opinion is that we will have to abandon the at-grade plan and instead, reluctantly, go for the underpass.
In regards to ramp or stairs, I feel that ramps are an excessive burden on the slope of the bluff. Stairs or steps are enough.
SANDAG has done an excellent job illustrating all the options.
Sincerely,
Camilla Rang
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: greg lippert <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 9:36 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 10 "Coastal Connections Planning Study Final Report" 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.
Hello,
With regards to Item 10 of the Coastal Connections Planning Report, I submit for consideration my preference for a North South Trail.
Thank you and please reach out if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Greg Lippert
757 Hoska Drive
2 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Gwynn Thomas <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 10:29 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Del Mar Track Cross Study along Bluffs
Attachments: Item10-TRACK-CROSSING-STUDY-from-DMC-packet-2023-04-17-sm.pdf 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 City Manager,
I have owned the homes at 149 6th Street and 151 6th Street in Del Mar since the early 1990’s.
Before that my father owned 149 6th Street starng in 1973.
Aer reviewing the Coastal Connecons Conceptual Planning Study what became very evident is that the tracks should have been moved inland 40 years ago.
What makes this parcularly clear is the photo on Page 21 Figure 2-9: Coaster Train Passing Seagrove Park (NCTD).
It is absolutely irresponsible environmentally and for public safety of persons on the train and pedestrians, that these trains are transing on a narrow, precarious bluff.
What are we doing here.
Instead of wasng everyone’s me, efforts and money on figuring out ways for pedestrians to cross the tracks, focus on moving the tracks inland now.
Gwynn Thomas
803 Amiford Dr, SD 92107
Owner 149 & 151 6th St, Del Mar
619 997-5219
3 April 17, 2023 Item 10
City of Del Mar
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Clem Brown, Assistant City Manager
DATE: April 14, 2023
SUBJECT: Red Dot Item 10: Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study Final Report, Public Feedback on Draft Design Concepts, and Recommendations for Further Evaluation
Item 10 on the City Council’s April 17, 2023, agenda includes a presentation from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) on the results of the public comment period for the Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study. At the time of the publication of the agenda packet, SANDAG’s presentation was not available to include in staff’s agenda report. Staff is submitting this red dot communication with a copy of the presentation that will be given to the City Council on April 17, 2023.
Attachment A – Presentation on Public Feedback on Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Coastal Connections
Conceptual Planning Study
Del Mar City Council
April 17, 2023
Attachment A 2 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Agenda
Study Purpose & Overview
Next Steps
Design Concepts
Public Outreach Summary
| 2
Attachment A 3 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Study Purpose & Overview
3 Attachment A 4 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Conceptual planning only: Selection of specific design elements will depend on a variety of factors to be resolved collaboratively moving forward – including regulatory agency input and public feedback • Goal: Evaluate opportunities and constraints of potential pedestrian access improvements in the Del Mar coastal rail corridor • Collaborative study with MOU between SANDAG, Del Mar, and NCTD • Funded by Caltrans planning grant
• Approx. 20 months: June 2021 – March 2023
• Concepts identified as mitigation in CCC Del Mar Bluffs Stabilization Phase 5 approval
Coastal Connections Study Purpose & Overview
| 4
Attachment A 5 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Study Area
Northern Boundary
Coast Boulevard (MP 244.1)
Southern Boundary
North Torrey Pines Road/
Torrey Pines State Beach
(MP 245.7)
| 5
• Coast Boulevard to North Torrey Pines Road/
Torrey Pines State Beach
• 1.6 miles single-tracked
Attachment A 6 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Coastal Connections Study Process
Existing
Conditions &
Feasibility
Assessments
Identification &
Screening of
Potential
Improvements
Selection of 7
Draft Concepts
for Development
& Evaluation
Public
Outreach and
Final Report
| 6
Jul 2021 – Dec 2021 Jan 2022 – Jun 2022 Jul 2022 – Dec 2022 Dec 2022 – Mar 2023 Attachment A 7 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Initial evaluation of entire project area
• North–South trails:
– West Side: Continuous facility infeasible
– East Side: Seagrove Park to 4th Street feasible
• Most feasible beach access locations:
– 11th Street/Sea Orbit Lane
– 7th/8th Streets
– Torrey Pines State Beach area
• Good alignment among several criteria, including engineering, existing movements and consistency with earlier findings including TRAC study Findings from Initial Screening
| 7
Attachment A 8 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• All concepts reviewed to ensure benefits over existing conditions:
– Pedestrian connectivity and coastal access
– New accessible paths and view overlooks
– Consistency with existing movement patterns
– Consistency with prior facilities, studies, and recommendations – Safety of railroad and bluffs
• Railroad crossings integrated with SANDAG planned seawalls • All footprints within public right-of-way (NCTD and City of Del Mar) • Conceptual planning only: Selection of specific design elements will depend on a variety of factors to be resolved collaboratively moving forward – including regulatory agency input & public feedback Universal Benefits Provided by All Design Concepts
| 8
Attachment A 9 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Design Concepts
9 Attachment A 10 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Design Concepts Studied
Seagrove Park to 4th Street:
• Concept 1: North – South Trail (0.8 miles)
11th Street:
• Concept 2: At-grade crossing, ramps & stairs to beach • Concept 3: At-grade crossing, stairs to beach
7th – 8th Streets:
• Concept 4: At-grade crossing, ramps to beach
• Concept 5: At-grade crossing, stairs to beach
• Concept 6: Undercrossing, ramps to beach
• Concept 7: Undercrossing, stairs to beach
| 10
Attachment A 11 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Public Outreach Summary
11 Attachment A 12 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Public Outreach Timeline
Final Report
April 2023
Community
Open House
Dec 7, 2022
Social Services
Transportation
Advisory
Council
Jan 17, 2023
End of Public
Comment
Period
February 1, 2023
City Council
Update –
Public
Comment
Period
Kickoff
Dec 5, 2022
| 12
Attachment A 13 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• 135 total responses
• Comments collected online and in person
• Key Topics Mentioned:
Summary of Outreach Results
| 13
Attachment A 14 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Rankings – Components of Design
Summary of Outreach Results
| 14
Attachment A 15 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Rankings – Draft Concepts
Summary of Outreach Results
| 15
Attachment A 16 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Support for North – South Trail was consistent throughout • Initial support for at-grade crossings
– Throughout the outreach period we heard growing concerns for potential impacts of atgrade alternatives including noise – Support for the undercrossing alternative grew throughout the comment period • Alternate ideas and proposals received during comment period – North – South Trail alignments
– Overcrossing near 10th Street
– At-grade crossing with gate system
Key Topics and Themes
| 16
Attachment A 17 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Next Steps
17 Attachment A 18 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Agreement needed between City of Del Mar, NCTD, and SANDAG on alternatives to bring forward to environmental clearance and preliminary engineering
• Preferred concepts need to include (per DMB5 Coastal
Commission Certification):
– A North/South trail from Seagrove Park to 4th Street
– One CPUC approved railroad crossing near 7th Street or 11th Street – One accessway to the beach
• All concepts will require approval from NCTD & City of Del Mar to utilize rights-of-way
Preferred Concepts Based on Community Input
| 18
Attachment A 19 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Concept 1:
North – South Trail
Concept 1: North – South Trail
• Seagrove Park to 4th St (0.8 miles)
• Accessible
• Connections to every street end (no alleys)
| 19
Attachment A 20 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Concept 2:
At-Grade Crossings at 11th Street
Concept 2: At-grade crossing at 11th St, ramps & stairs to beach • Artificial fill on western bluffs north of 11th St provides ample space for stairs and/or ramps
• Aligns with existing movement patterns
• Integrated with SANDAG planned seawalls
• Noise impacts from audible warning systems and train horns | 20
Attachment A 21 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Concept 6:
Undercrossing at 7th – 8th Streets
Concept 6: Undercrossing at 7th-8th St, ramps to beach
• Feasible from engineering perspective
• More development, walls & grading than other crossing types • Eliminates noise impacts compared to at-grade crossings • Aligns with existing movement patterns
• Integrated with SANDAG planned seawalls
| 21
Attachment A 22 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• All concepts provide substantial benefits over existing conditions:
– Accessible North – South Trail
– Accessible connections to street ends
– Accessible view overlooks at western bluff tops in all railroad crossings • Multiple options for all crossing concepts (e.g., ramps & stairs) • Balance accessibility with minimization of impacts to sensitive bluffs • Project team visited the SANDAG Social Services Technical Advisory Council (SSTAC) in January 2023 for additional input
• Multi-agency collaboration to continue moving forward • Some funding sources may require certain accessible design elements Accessibility Design Considerations
| 22
Attachment A 23 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Requires discretionary approval by CPUC
• Noise impacts from audible warning systems
and/or train horns
• Safety fencing and signal house
At-Grade Crossings
| 23
Attachment A 24 April 17, 2023 Item 10
• Allocation of funding and grant applications
• Design:
– Final concept selection
– Grade separation and safety study
– Accessibility decisions
• Environmental review
• CCC approval
• CPUC approval of new crossings
• City & NCTD right-of-way approvals, including
maintenance & liability agreements
• Construction
Next Steps Following Coastal Connections Study
Can we add a
graphic here?
| 24
Attachment A 25 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Next Steps Following Coastal Connections Study
| 25
Milestone Estimated Timeline & Notes
Conceptual Planning Study Complete
Preliminary Design
Identification of Project Funding In Progress
Selection of Preferred Projects In Progress
Grade Separation and Safety Study 3-6 Months
Accessibility Decision 3-6 Months
Preliminary Design (30%) 6-12 Months
Community & Stakeholder Outreach 6-12 Months (concurrent with PE activities) Attachment A 26 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Next Steps Following Coastal Connections Study
(Continued)
| 26
Milestone Estimated Timeline & Notes
Environmental and Agency Reviews
CEQA/NEPA Reviews 6-12 months, concurrent with PE activities CCC Approval of Draft Design Concurrent with CEQA/NEPA, plus 3-6 months CPUC Approval of Draft Design 6-12 months, concurrent with environmental & agency reviews (Formal CPUC process at 60% design)
City of Del Mar Approval of Draft Design 6-12 months, concurrent with environmental & agency reviews Includes maintenance and liability agreements
NCTD Approval of Draft Design 6-12 months, concurrent with environmental & agency reviews Includes maintenance and liability agreements
Final Design 6-12 Months following PE, environmental & agency reviews Permit Issuance 3-6 months, concurrent with Final Design Construction 2-3 years following final design and permits Attachment A 27 April 17, 2023 Item 10
Connect with Us:
Website: KeepSanDiegoMoving.com/CoastalConnections
Follow us on social media: @SANDAGregion @SANDAG
Email: [email protected]
Hotline: (858) 549-Rail
Allie DeVaux, Senior Engineer & Study Project Manager
Attachment A 28 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Mark Handzel <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 12:02 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot - Item 10. The Agenda Report says that SANDAG's public-outreach survey results did not lead to any of the seven options being particularly re-ranked.
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 Members,
Before you decide on moving forward with the choices that SANDAG has presented, the City Council should demand the actual results of the survey from SANDAG and make them public. Surveys are a primary source of information -- that is, the public was directly asked for a response to a set of questions. The people of Del Mar took the time to provide input to the survey and should be presented with participation results and top and bottom survey results. The detailed survey results will give a snapshot of the public's attitudes and behaviors – including thoughts, opinions, and comments, which is the purpose of the survey. I believe the people of Del Mar will be keen to hear about the survey's detailed findings and observations. The detailed survey results are valuable feedback to measure and establish the public's interest and issues in the various choices. It will also give you a better gauge of the choices' public ranking, which will help drive greater engagement and collaboration. SANDAG needs to provide detailed survey results so the City Council can discuss survey results and get a consensus with the public on the next steps before moving forward. The detailed results are best done in a format that encourages open dialogue. The detailed survey results will also help the City Council take the most appropriate actions transparently.
Mark Handzel
100 12th Street
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Udo Wahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 4:10 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot: SANDAG coastal presentation
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 City Council members:
As a 40 year resident of Del Mar I would like chime in about the options for projects on our bluffs.
I support the development of a North-South Path trail for pedestrians and also an undercrossing at 7-8th streets with stairs.
I would like to add, that it would be advisable to add access to the bluff top West of the tracks as one exits the underground tunnel. There are dirt trails there now that we should be able to continue accessing.
By allowing access northward one may be able to descend at 11th street on the existing trail without there being a needing to have any development there. That would require that NCTD not fence that area off.
Thank you!
Aloha!
Udo
Udo Wahn M.D.
Stratford Court
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Bill Carpenter <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2023 7:45 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: City Council Meeting 4/17/23 Item 10: SANDAG's Coastal Connections - public comment
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.
Please choose Concepts 6,7,1 for future focus, especially the combinaon of 6 & 1 (undercrossing at 7th with stairs + trail).
Only a passive, quiet, safe undercrossing makes sense and only 7-8th street locaon accommodates that. Plus, that’s a halfway locaon between 1
st and 15th street, and is closest to the 8th Street surfing reef.
Fences and bells for at-grade crossings are dangerous, noisy, require maintenance and a longer approval path. Have you noced that in the last couple of months there have been two pedestrian fatalies in Leucadia with at-grade crossings – despite fences and bells that are ugly and expensive to maintain? Thanks,
Bill Carpenter
Luneta Dr
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Will Grant <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2023 10:41 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Meghan
Subject: Train Track Crossing Options
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.
Hello,
My wife and I live at 300 7th St, Del Mar, CA 92014.
Our vote for top 3 options are as follows:
#1
CONCEPT 5: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS, STAIRS TO BEACH #2
CONCEPT 7: UNDERCROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS, STAIRS TO BEACH #3
CONCEPT 4: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS, RAMPS TO BEACH Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Will and Meghan Grant
2 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: James Mccullough <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2023 8:47 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Megan McCullough
Subject: Beach access options
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 whom it may concern,
My wife and I are home owners in Del Mar west of Stratford. We feel the 11TH street location makes the most sense due to the following factors:
1)Considerably wider street than 7th or 8th thus able to handle increased congestion better. 2) More street parking than 7th or 8th.
3)Closer to existing public parking.
4) More central location in town.
5) 11TH street has been the traditional access to this part of the beach going back to the inception of the city.
Thank you for your consideration,
James & Megan McCullough
Sent from my iPad
3 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: S. Gallouzi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 8:15 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Safe Railroad Crossing Options Are Being Decided 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.
My name is Sol Gallouzi, Del Mar resident at 711 Hoska Dr, Del Mar, CA 92014. I think Concepts 4-7 make more sense since access through 11th street is likely to be harder given traffic and accessibility.
Thanks
Sol
4 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: leila bousrih <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 6:39 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: leila bousrih
Subject: Railroad Crossing Options Are Being Decided
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.
My name is Leila Bousrih, Del Mar resident at 711 Hoska Dr, Del Mar, CA 92014. I think Concepts 4-7 make more sense since access through 11th Street is likely to be harder given traffic and accessibility.
Thanks
Leila
5 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Laura Schaefer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 7:04 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot item 10
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 Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I would like to address the Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study and the various concepts advanced by SANDAG. I support an underpass between 7th and 8th Street because 1) an underpass provides a safer access than an at grade crossing; 2) it preserves the public’s peaceful enjoyment of the bluffs while still affording the public access to the beach it has enjoyed for centuries; 3) it does not create a visual and noise nuisance to nearby residents; 4) it will be more accessible to all residents because it is at an equidistant point between 4th and 11th streets and; 5) CPUC approval of an at grade crossing is not a given and could result in the project - and beach access - being significantly delayed for months or years.
Second, I support the North South Trail concept, with a caveat. As the Council knows, in the past the NCTD attempted to strong arm the City into signing a licensing agreement with onerous terms in exchange for an attractive fence similar to what is currently proposed for the North South Trail concept. The Coastal Commission’s agreement with SANDAG and NCTD calls for the creation of a formalized trail, and additionally anticipates that the City, SANDAG and NCTD will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) governing the use of the trail and beach access. I support the North South Trail concept, but urge the City to be vigilant and not agree to the terms this Council previously rejected in the licensing agreement proposed by the NCTD.
The underpass is a safer alternative that will allow the public and residents to enjoy the bluffs in peace.
All rational stakeholders agree that the train should be moved off the Bluffs, but this relocation will take at least 10 years to accomplish. Given that the public has accessed the beach for centuries, and that access will effectively be cut off by seawalls and the new trail fence, this requires that a safe and legal access be afforded to the public in a timely manner. Of the concepts advanced by SANDAG, I support an underground pass-through at 8th Street as the most viable mitigation, pending the transfer of the tracks off the Bluffs.
There are compelling reasons to reject an at-grade crossing anywhere on the corridor. First, the Federal Railroad Administration and the CPUC require underpasses, not at grade crossings, for a reason -- they are safer. As this Council is aware, nearly all of the accidents occur at or near the 15th street crossing; there have been no accidents south of 9th Street for decades or longer. The Council should be especially reluctant to support a hazard where none currently exists south of 9th street. By choosing the underpass over an at grade crossing, the City sends a clear message that its citizens are concerned about safety, contrary to the baseless accusations levied against Del Mar citizens by the NCTD Board in its Surface Transportation Board (STB) litigation. 6 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 Second, the noise associated with at grade crossings is unacceptable; the residents and those who walk the bluff would be unable to enjoy the bluffs because of the noise from train horns. The residents along the bluff would bear the brunt of this noise disturbance, as well as the visual disturbance of flashing lights.
This leads to the third point. It is my understanding that the CPUC, in evaluating the application for an at grade crossing, takes into consideration the visual and noise impacts on nearby residents. The Santa Claus Lane project was in a “rural area” adjacent to a highway, where the visual impact of the project was negligible, only to be seen by “passing motorists” (see page 5 of Santa Claus lane application). The nearest residence to the Santa Claus Lane crossing was 650 feet to the north and 1100 feet to the south. All this is to say that CPUC approval is not assured and a denial would take us back to the drawing board. And it is also my understanding that these crossings are subject to monitoring and may be revisited if they present a hazard. I do not believe this is worth the risk when there is an alternative that is more readily attained.
Finally, if the goal of this project is to funnel people toward a safe and legal crossing, it makes no sense to put it at 11th or farther south than 8th. 8th Street is at least equidistant between 4th and 11th. While there will be disturbance to the bluff, it is my understanding that this is an area that has been artificially filled, and that SANDAG may use an existing concrete structure in constructing the underpass. I do believe that to minimize the disturbance to the bluff, only stairs should be considered. I understand this may cause it to be less accessible and result in the loss of certain sources of funding, but access can be had at Torrey Pines and 15th Streets. If this project can be realized without ramps, that would be preferred.
The City should carefully consider the terms of any MOU with NCTD and provide the residents with an opportunity to weigh in before the Council binds the City I understand that the Coastal Commission’s agreement with the NCTD and SANDAG anticipates that an MOU will be negotiated with respect to the beach access and north south trail. While I am not convinced that a trial or fencing is required south of 8th street where no train accidents have historically occurred, I understand that this is part of the agreement between SANDAG, the NCTD and the Coastal Commission. I support the trail and the less visually offensive fencing proposed by SANDAG; it is certainly preferable to the hog wire chain link spite fence the NCTD Board has voted to erect on the upper bluff. The more attractive fencing will obviate the need for NCTD’s proposed ugly hog wire fencing. Obviously, the NCTD at one point must have believed that this would suffice to render the area safe, because it is similar in style to the one the NCTD proposed in 2021. With the approved plan for a continuous fence on the upper bluff agreed to by all major stakeholders, it will become apparent to the STB that the NCTD has some ulterior motive, and is not concerned about safety, as it has claimed.
I hope, however, that the City is vigilant regarding NCTD’s motives in negotiating the MOU. It is important for the City to stand firm and not undertake any liability for train strikes; not cede control over the bluffs to NCTD (as contemplated by the licensing agreement proposed by NCTD that was rejected by the Council), and not relinquish any lawful rights in favor of NCTD. The City is not a party to the agreement between SANDAG, NCTD and the Coastal Commission. It is the California public, not just Del Mar residents, that will benefit from beach access and formalized trails. Del Mar has no obligation to cede any lawful rights it may have.
Additionally, I would expect that the City would allow the public adequate time to weigh in on any such agreement before the City binds the residents.
Those are my thoughts. I hope the City seriously considers these points in choosing a concept and in negotiating with NCTD on the MOU.
Sincerely,
7 April 17, 2023 Item 10
3 Laura Schaefer
158 6th Street
Del Mar CA
8 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: ATT E-Mail <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 9:58 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Train Track Crossing and Beach Access Options
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 Del Mar City Council:
Please vote to implement Concept 3 (at-grade crossing at 11th Street with stairs to beach) or Concept 5 (at-grade crossing at 7th - 8th Streets with stairs to beach). These two concepts are best because they will be least destructive to the bluff that we want to preserve. Undercrossings and ramps in the other plans would drastically change the bluff.
Perhaps a barrier or gate that locks when a train approaches would help minimize noise from alarms.
I think we should remember that this is only a
temporary crossing until the tunnel is completed in 2035.
If Concepts 3 or 5 cannot be implemented, my next choice would be Concept 1 (the North - South Trail).
Thank you for your assistance with this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Wendy Root Cate
615 Stratford Court #8
Del Mar, CA 92014
9 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 10:15 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Tracy Martinez; Dwight Worden; Dan Quirk; Terry Gaasterland; David Druker Subject: April 17, 2023 City Council Meeting, Item 10
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 City Clerk,
Kindly submit the red dot communication below in the record for Item 10.
Dear Honorable Mayor Martinez and Member of the City Council:
I am a longtime resident and property owner in Del Mar. I have reviewed the Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study ( Coastal Connections Study) dated March 7. 2023 that was commissioned in 2021, as well as SANDAG’s Power Point Presentation published as part of the April 17, 2023 Del Mar City Council Public Meeting Agenda. I thank SANDAG for its analysis and thoughtful process. These are my thoughts:
BEACH ACCESS
As I wrote to SANDAG, I support an underground pass-through at 8th Street as the most viable mitigation option for access to the beach, pending the transfer of the tracks off the Bluffs.
At-grade crossings are too problematic. The Coastal Connections Study projects “a significant increase in passenger trains in the future…”, (p.21). Given the planned further commercialization of our Bluffs through significant increase in freight and passenger train traffic and speed, the horn-sounding and clanging requirements for trains approaching any added at-grade crossings would result in virtually constant noise pollution. This would obliterate the ethereal experience provided to all who enjoy walking or running on the Bluffs as well as place a disproportionate burden and loss of property value caused by the increased commercialization of the Bluffs on homeowners who live next to the Bluffs. Instead, I believe an underground passage at 8th is the best solution proposed for access to the beach until the transfer of the tracks off the Bluffs.
NORTH SOUTH TRAIL AND THE MOU
I support the North/South trail as depicted by SANDAG and conditioned upon environmental review and permit issuance (as represented in SANDAG’s PPT), to assure no geologic harm caused by the proposed fencing. I note that SANDAG has declined to take a public position on NCTD’s proposal for heavy metal fencing on the Upper and Lower Bluffs. The Study acknowledges that litigation has placed NCTD fencing plans “on hold.” However, the SANDAG proposed North-South Trail (in response to Coastal Commission’s mandate for mitigation) of course must be viewed along with NCTD’s proposed fencing plans (which contradict 10 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 SANDAG’s). At p. 22, The Coastal Connections Study cross-references NCTD’s October, 2021 fence plans, but this reference is outdated. At its January 20, 2022 meeting, NCTD’s Board (except for Del Mar’s representative) voted to issue a job order to fence Del Mar’s Bluffs with heavy black metal 6ft-high hogwire fencing. As you will recall, NCTD gave Del Mar an ultimatum: sign their proposed licensing and risk-shifting agreement or the 6ft. heavy metal fence goes up on the Upper Bluff starting in April, 2022. Litigation filed in California by the Friends of Del Mar Bluffs and later the Coastal Commission was the only thing that intercepted NCTD’s plans. Meanwhile both the Coastal Commission and Del Mar continue to oppose NCTD’s aggressive petition for an order nullifying California Law in an action it filed in Washington D.C. before the Surface Transportation Board.
NCTD’s behavior thus far is a warning to the City to be vigilant because a Memorandum of Understanding is to be struck among NCTD, SANDAG and Del Mar after Environmental Approval and Coastal Commission acceptance of final concept selection of SANDAG’s mitigation proposals. It became clear when Del Mar published NCTD’s 2022 proposed agreement that the terms were designed by NCTD to shift too much risk to Del Mar. It would have given NCTD the right to remove or change the Upper Bluff at its discretion, forced Del Mar to waive numerous legal rights including the right to sue for damage from train vibration (NCTD plans to dramatically increase number, speed and frequency of trains on the Bluffs and wanted an advance release from liability). Del Mar would have had to pay NCTD’s staff for various tasks and take on insurance, indemnification and maintenance exposure disproportionately benefiting NCTD. Wisely, the City Council rejected NCTD’s 2022 proposed agreement after receiving robust public protest. NCTD continues to publicly understate and downplay the demands its proposed agreement made on Del Mar. We can’t have history repeat itself with the MOU.
I support the SANDAG North/South Trail mitigation proposal, provided it is not conditioned on forcing Del Mar to agree to the same or similar disastrous terms as NCTD’s 2022 proposed agreement. NCTD cannot use the MOU as a backdoor attempt to obtain terms the City rejected. SANDAG’s agreement to implement the Coastal Commission’s mitigation requirements do us no good if they come at the expense of Del Mar undertaking outsized risks that could bankrupt it, or relinquish important rights that a rogue local transit district has no right to ask Del Mar to relinquish.
I strongly urge the City Council to be vigilant against NCTD attempts to use the MOU to force the same terms on Del Mar that the City Council wisely rejected on February 28, 2022. I respectfully request that the City Council consider appointing a Citizens’ Advisory Committee to help it think through any proposed MOU, so that the City Council may receive broader thoughtful and timely input on obligations that could bind the City for more than a decade. This would be in addition to input provided by the City Counsel. Thank you.
Respectfully submitted,
Shirli Weiss
551 Stratford Court
858.449.4850
11 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Drew Keeling <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 6:34 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: re Railroad Crossing Options (Agenda item #10, City Council meeting April 17, 2023) 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 City Clerk and City Council members:
Thank for you looking into possible ways to improve the safety and viability of railroad crossings for pedestrians accessing the beach from the bluffs (email of Mayor Martinez, April 14, 2023 below, re the April 17, 2023 Council meeting).
When I grew in Del Mar, in the 1960s and early ’70s, most people going to the beach in Del Mar also lived in Del Mar. That has, of course, changed significantly since then, with increased growth of both the North County population and tourism. I would, however, suggest that there are probably ways to make beach access safer (for locals and non-locals) without directly facilitating greater use of the beach and bluffs by visitors from out of town. My impression is that most non-local beach visitors drive to Del Mar, and it is thus encouraging to see that the Council (on the same meeting agenda) is also actively considering new parking policies and procedures, which I would hope might help keep residential streets from becoming frequently lined with parked cars.
Consistent with these observations, I would favor new railroad crossing concepts likely to improve the safety of beach access but without more traffic and cars coming into Del Mar as a result. It also seems to me that the defacto bluff paths of the past, between 4th and 11th streets, have been mostly traversed by local walkers and joggers, and by surfers (local and non-local). Non-local beach visitors, other than surfers, are evidently mainly concentrated near Seagrove Park and the lifeguard station there.
For safer track crossing without promoting increased visitors to the “south beach” area, “Concept 5: At-grade crossing at 7th-8th streets with stairs,” therefore looks to me like the best of the seven listed alternatives. It seems closer (to what we have had until now in that area) than undercrossings or ramps would be. An undercrossing (e.g. Concept 7) would be somewhat safer, and I guess avoid noisy horn sounds, but would cost more -perhaps including redesigning later if trains were rerouted off the bluffs- and more likely lead to increased visitors driving in from out of town and parking. Concept 5 also looks preferable to concepts 1-4 and 6, for those same reasons.
Thank you for addressing these matters and for seeking public input.
Drew Keeling
1158 Cuchara
Del Mar, CA
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Mayor Tracy Martinez <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: April 14, 2023
Subject: Safe Railroad Crossing Options Are Being Decided 12 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 Tracy Martinez
Mayor of Del Mar
TRAIN TRACK CROSSING AND BEACH ACCESS OPTIONS
BEING PRESENTED THIS MONDAY - NEED YOUR INPUT!
April 14, 2023
Dear Del Mar Residents and
Friends;
During our next City Council
meeting, scheduled for THIS
coming Monday, April 17, at 4:30
pm, the City Council will receive
the final version of SANDAG's
“Coastal Connections”
Conceptual Planning Study,
which provides seven different
options for safe railroad crossings
and beach access at the south
part of town.
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Photo credit - Terry Gaasterland
THE TRAIN TRACK CROSSING OPTIONS INCLUDE:
CONCEPT 1: NORTH-SOUTH TRAIL
CONCEPT 2: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 11TH STREET, RAMPS
& STAIRS TO BEACH
CONCEPT 3: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 11TH STREET, STAIRS
TO BEACH
CONCEPT 4: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS,
RAMPS TO BEACH
CONCEPT 5: AT-GRADE CROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS,
STAIRS TO BEACH
CONCEPT 6: UNDERCROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS, RAMPS
TO BEACH
13 April 17, 2023 Item 10
3 CONCEPT 7: UNDERCROSSING AT 7TH-8TH STREETS, STAIRS
TO BEACH
The costs range from $9.6 million to $12.8 million.
SANDAG will present a summary and is asking that Del Mar City Council choose the top three options for further evaluation. Your input is important to ensure that we, as your City Council representatives, choose the three options that best reflect our residents' views.
For more details and renderings of the seven options being presented, please access the City Council Agenda packet for Monday, April 17, 2023 - Item #10 "Coastal Connections Planning Study Final Report" beginning on page 354 of the packet.
https://www.delmar.ca.us/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_04172023- 3191
You can make your voice heard and share your opinion in a number of ways:
1. By submitting a "Red Dot" letter by email [email protected]
2. By attending and speaking at the City Council meeting at City Hall beginning at 4:30 pm
3. By attending the meeting by zoom:
Zoom Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84790910014
Phone: (669) 900-6833
Meeting ID: 847 9091 0014
For more information about public comments, please visit:
https://www.delmar.ca.us/publiccomment
Mayor's Hours
I will be holding office hours next Wednesday, April 19th from 1:00 pm to 2:30 pm in the lobby of L'Auberge Del Mar, located at 1540 Camino Del Mar. I hope you will stop by to chat. Future office hours include: May 17; Jun. 21; July 19; (no Aug.); Sep. 20; October 18; Nov. 15; and Dec. 20.
You can also contact me directly if you would like to discuss these options or any other concerns. I am reachable by email
at [email protected] or by cell phone 619-823-6050. 14 April 17, 2023 Item 10
4 Please visit my website DelMarMayorTracyMartinez.com for additional information about me and my priorities as mayor.
I also hope you will stay informed by signing up to receive the Del Mar Weekly e-newsletter https://www.delmar.ca.us/352/Del-MarWeekly published every Friday by Del Mar City Hall. It provides key city information.
I am proud to serve as your mayor this year. My goal is that we all work together to do what is right for Del Mar.
I hope you'll take the opportunity to make your voice heard on the train track crossing issue.
To help
protect your
privacy,
Microso ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Sincerely,
Tracy
Tracy Martinez
Mayor of Del Mar
Visit My Website
Contact Me
Tracy Martinez, Mayor of Del Mar | Del Mar City Hall, 1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, CA 92014 www.DelMarMayorTracyMartinez.com
Unsubscribe [email protected]
Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice
Sent by [email protected] in collaboration with To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Trusted Email
from
Try email marketing for free today!
15 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: karen lare <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 6:54 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Tracy Martinez; Terry TG. Gaasterland; Dwight Worden; Dan Quirk; Dave Druker Subject: SANDAG Study results Item #10 on Council Agenda 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 Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
We read with interest the results from SANDAGs study of options on the track crossing for Del Mar.
We have also read the input from residents and interested parties. It was surprising that there was not a clearer delineation in results but after consideration and discussion with many it seems that what we all really want is not feasible given the rules and restrictions. We all want an at grade simple crossing but with no lights and no bells. This would do the least damage to the bluffs and be the simplest for all. But with all of the discussions and research done by many, I believe we all understand that this is not possible. So then what is the right solution? That seems to differ depending on your view of the situation and proximity to the tracks. We would put our vote in for the underground crossing at 8th street and the simplest path down the bluff to the beach. So this would be stairs and no ramps as handicap access is available at Torrey Pines and at 15th street. We would however request a connection between the underground crossing and the existing north south trail. This connection did not exist on any drawings and in discussion with the SANDAG team it is very feasible but not considered at the time of the concept was created. If this connection is not created we will still have people trying to cross the tracks to get to the trail on the west side.
We would also support the north south trail as long as all appropriate studies were done and permits acquired but would request that fencing along this trail be minimal and allow the views to be considered for all using the path and those living along it.
Thank you for all the work you do for our community,
Karen and Eddie Lare
161 Sea Cliff Way
Del Mar CA
16 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Bruce Watson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 7:39 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item # 10 City Council Agenda 041723
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.
Hi,
Having train track crossing bells and whistles installed anywhere in Del Mar, especially near 7th or 8th Street, is not an acceptable solution. Additionally, this entire exercise is a waste of time and $money. The tracks should be moved near I-5 or under Crest Canyon.
Sincerely,
Bruce and Sandy Watson
629 Nob Ave. Del Mar
Sent from my iPhone
17 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Laura DeMarco <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 7:40 AM
To: Tracy Martinez; Terry Gaasterland; David Druker
Cc: City Clerk Mail Box; Ashley Jones; Amanda Lee
Subject: Red dot Item 10: Coastal Connections Access Panning Study feedback 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 City Council Members and Staff,
The best Coastal Connections project for Del Mar’s Bluffs is to move speeding trains off these unstable bluffs, which is rightfully SANDAG’s top priority in their approved Regional Transportation Plan. Unfortunately, this was not one of the options offered in the Planning Study.
Federal, state, and local tax dollars and staff time would best be spent on helping SANDAG to achieve its goal of moving speeding trains off Del Mar’s bluffs by 2035. Why spend millions on the offered Coastal Connections Study projects made obsolete when the tracks are removed in 12 years? The City of Del Mar cannot approve any Coastal Connections project that requires approval of NCTD’s proposed 1.5 miles of 6 ft-high wire fencing on each side of the tracks so pedestrians can only access new legal rail crossing(s) on the bluffs since installation requires drilling over 1,400 fence post holes, 3ft deep x 1 ft wide every 10 feet, and creating new sources of destabilizing water intrusion that increases the catastrophic risk of bluff slides.
The best model for any Coastal Connections project on Del Mar’s bluffs are the pathways at nearby Torrey Pines State Park where natural landforms are preserved with minimal fencing. Priority is given to reducing erosion and preserving the stability of the bluffs so no destabilizing excavation is allowed.
Paths down the bluffs to the beach use steps edged with railroad ties to maintain pedestrian footing and reduce erosion. There are no downward-sloping ramps of deconstructed granite which are very treacherous for pedestrians as they are slippery. Ramps were rejected for pedestrian access since they channel the destructive force and weight of torrential storm water on to the structurally weak bluff face that is already prone to dangerous slides.
The best and least destructive option of the offered Del Mar Bluff Coastal Connections Planning Study projects is the North-South trail (#1) BUT only if it does not require extensive destructive fencing and excavation into the upper bluff to widen pathways.
The best and most minimally invasive crossing of railroad tracks are at-grade at 11th and 7-8th St. (#3 & 5) BUT only if they do not require 1.5 miles of fencing on each side of the tracks or repeated horn blasts 50+ times daily. If that is not possible, the best option is the 7-8th St. underpass (#7) BUT 18 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 only where it is a filled-in canyon and not structurally part of the natural bluff. Steps should be used with rail ties, not slippery ramps.
The 7-8th St. rail crossing also offers the best public access to visitors who can park in one of the 100+ parking spaces, including handicapped-accessible spaces, at the nearby Winston School at the corner of 9th and Stratford. Unlike the civic center parking lot, Winston’s is available during peak visitor times every weekend, weekday afternoons after 3 pm, and during the school’s long summer and holiday breaks. The civic center’s parking lot is full every Saturday afternoon during the Farmers Market.
The city of Del Mar should carefully consider the costs of assuming the unfunded liability from the proposed Coastal Connections projects. Del Mar’s CIP budget is already underfunded and overburdened with the costs of maintaining badly deteriorating roads like San Dieguito Rd., Oribia Rd., Jimmy Durante Blvd., and many other residential streets; replacing two bridges over the San Dieguito Lagoon as well as the overpass above Jimmy Durante Blvd.; funding Del Mar’s Sea Level Rose Adaptation Plan requiring $10 million for sand replenishment every 10 years; removing or covering the dangerous slippery deep drainage ditches on 9th St. by Shores Park, 11th and 15th St., maintaining the Torrey Pines bridge; etc.
Can the city of Del Mar and our 4,200 residents really afford adding tens of millions more in long-term costs for the Coastal Connection project’s ongoing maintenance, removing and/or modifying the project when the tracks are relocated, and indemnifying NCTD and the railroads for their damage to the bluffs and any subsequent landslides like those which recently killed three women beachgoers whose families sued the city of Encinitas? A judge’s recent ruling in the Encinitas case shows that the city of Del Mar and the Coastal Commission would not be shielded from liability for “natural condition immunity” under Government Code 831.2 by those killed or injured from landslides caused by the Coastal Connections Projects as well as from the cumulative damage from 100 years of heavy trains operating on the fragile bluffs.
Bottom line, the best Coastal Connections plan is to move the tracks off the bluff by 2035 in accordance with SANDAG’s RTP. This would save the city of Del Mar tens of millions in long-term liability for Coastal Connections projects made obsolete when the tracks are removed in 12 years.
Thanks for your consideration,
Laura
19 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: FW: Red Dot Letter re: SANDAG Coastal Connections Item 10, 04/17/2023 Council Meeting
-----Original Message-----
From: L Mike Maier <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2023 6:36 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box <[email protected]>
Subject: Red Dot Letter re: SANDAG Coastal Connections Item 10, 04/17/2023 Council Meeting 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,
Of the 7 Concepts being considered, I would like to request the Council to support the following Concepts:
Concept 1 North-south trail
Concept 6 Undercrossing at 7th/8th street ramp to beach Concept 7 Undercrossing at 7th/8th street stairs to beach None of the "Overcrossing" plans (Concepts 2, 3, 4, & 5) , are viable options due to the severe noise level that would be created by the crossing alarms and train horns as the number of trains running through Del Mar continues to significantly increase each year. It's unreasonable and unacceptable to subject residents to this noise day in and day out.
Thank you.
Mike Maier
266 Surfview Ct
20 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Karl Willert <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 10:15 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: April 17 2023 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 10 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 Clerk,
I submit the following Red Dot letter concerning Item 10.
Dear Honorable Mayor Martinez and Members of City Council, I have lived in Del Mar since 2003, and on a nearly daily basis, I cross the railroad tracks to access the beach below the bluffs at 7th Street. I have done so without difficulty and risk.
As you evaluate the top 3 concept designs for railroad crossings advanced by SANDAG, I would like for you to consider a 4 th: do nothing. Here’s the argument:
1. Crossing the tracks has been safe and uncomplicated for the past century. While tragedies have occurred, no one has ever been killed while crossing the tracks. Millions of people, residents and visitors, cross the tracks per year without incidents.
2. The railroad tracks will be moved off the bluffs in the next decade. With the continuously crumbling bluffs, this realignment is essential for continued train operations. It is only a matter of time that another bluff collapse will force termination of train operations.
3. In light of points 1 and 2, the proposed crossings are a waste of public funds. It would be wiser to focus our limited resources on accelerating the process to relocate the railroad tracks. These crossings will only serve to push the track realignment further into the future.
Given that the proposed crossings serve as mitigation for bluff reinforcement – leaving us with seawalls that we never wanted and crossings that are not needed – my request for status quo will likely fall on deaf ears. Be that as it may, I ask you to exercise extreme caution in advancing any one of these proposals and to oppose any additional construction on our beautiful bluffs, in particular, any type of fencing that will block access to the bluff top and the beach below.
Sincerely,
Karl Willert
131 Sea Cliff Way, Del Mar
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Al Tarkington <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 10:59 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot Item #10
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 Martinez and City Council Members.
I support an at grade crossing at either 11th Street or 7th Street, but only with the following conditions:
1. Automatic locking gates to prevent pedestrian access when trains approach.
2. No flashing lights.
3. No intersection horns or bells.
At-grade pedestrian crossings with locking gates are used effectively all over the world. Even the North County Transit District Sprinter Line uses gates for pedestrians at stops to direct them safely to trains.
I, along with Dwight Worden as an individual, presented a detailed Pedestrian At-Grade proposal to SANDAG earlier this year. The pedestrian crossings would be the safest at-grade crossings existence and safer than any North County Transit District now has.
Flashing lights and horns are inappropriate and unnecessary with proper pedestrian controls. The Del Mar Blufftop is not a highway intersection. It is simply individual people crossing the tracks at a walking pace.
Regarding the speed and frequency of trains, the speed along the bluffs is dictated by the curves and sight-line distance at 15th Street and the Torrey Pines curve. Top speeds are approximately 35-40 miles per hour compared with over 60 miles per hour in other locations.
The frequency of trains could double or triple, and the length of time gates would be closed to pedestrians would be insignificant.
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 I urge the City Council to ask SANDAG to take a second look at my and Dwight Worden’s proposal for a safe at-grade pedestrian crossing for either 7th Street or 11th Street or possibly both.
Sincerely,
Al Tarkington
2 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Kerridge, Carol <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 11:20 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot for Item #10
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 would like to give thanks and acknowledgement to all
Native American Tribal Nations who were the First People in this region.
For a millennium, Native Americans have lived on this land while giving respect and wisdom to maintain its rich natural resources by nourishing, healing, restoring, protecting, and embracing these resources for many generations
in a relationship of balance and harmony.
Dear City Council Members,
As we have begun with the task of making very difficult decisions about the bluff in our town, I feel particularly sad about our accessibility of the beach being restricted. For years we took for granted that we could walk to the end of our street, climb down the hill and enjoy a swim, bogie board, surf, or just take a simple walk on the beach. It never crossed our minds that we would be the generation having to make these complicated decisions as global warming has reared its head much earlier than expected and has quickly made our bluffs more fragile.
Realizing that as the ocean storms have increased and the tidal waves have undermined the bluff structure at the beach level, there are many more frequent bluff failures. Along with the recent heavy rainfalls we have experienced, we are forced to make decisions to our accessibility to the beach safe and make this decision soon.
I think that of the options that we are presented with, the option that makes more sense to me...I vote for Concept 3, which avoids possible underground construction which could compromise the bluff even more. If financially possible, Concept 5 could also be included.
Thanks much to you and for your time and energy devoted to resolving this difficult decision.
Warm regards,
Carol Kerridge
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: FW: RR Crossings
On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 10:57 AM Kurt Snider <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Terry,
I just re-read the various options for crossing the tracks. I would like to make a comment about warning systems and train horns. As I'm sure you know, we can already hear the 15th street crossing at 4th street when the weather is right. Adding more crossings that include noise is not a good solution.
The undercrossings seem like the best solution, but I hope the city will oppose ramps. During the summer there's hardly any parking at the bluff access points and there's enough handicapped beach access at Powerhouse Park and the Lifeguard HQ. Why spend the extra money? Also, if ramps are built will handicapped parking be required?
Once there's an easy way down to the amazing uncrowded beach at the foot of those bluffs Stratford Court and the streets adjacent to any crossing will be very busy. But I'm not sure if there's any way to mitigate that.
Good luck with a tough decision.
Regards,
Kurt Snider
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: James Hindman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 2:53 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Reference item 10
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.
City Council Members,
I am in favor of the North/South trail and the underpass at 7th/8th street with related stairs to the beach. Under no circumstances are at grade crossings acceptable due to the noise that will be required to operate them. In addition, I believe there should be permit parking for residents on 7th and 8th streets due to the increased traffic/parking that will be caused by the underpass. Thank you for taking my input into consideration.
Jim Hindman
119 8th Street
Sent from my iPhone
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
APRIL 17, 2023
Item 5 – List of Demands
1. Is the $190,000 on the list of the demands the total for the San Dieguito Drive slope collapse/road failure and the repair is complete? Staff Response: Southland was the as-needed emergency services contractor for both the San Dieguito Drive Road Failure Repair Project ($107,000) and the San Dieguito Drive Pipeline Repair Project ($83,000), together totaling $190,000. Both projects are complete.
Item 9 – Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022 and Audited Financial Results
1. The table on page 175 of the packet indicates that the number of housing units in Del Mar changed by 7.73%. Why is that number shown in () which seems to indicate a decline?
Staff Response: The 7.73% decline is in Del Mar population. In 2021, the City of Del Mar population was reported at 4,258, and in 2022 it was reported at 3,929, which is a 7.73% decline.
2. The table on page 176 shows the Del Mar labor force and the "employed" both at 2,200. Is this for 2022? Does it include the fairgrounds employees? From the table on the next page, 177, it seems it does include the thoroughbred employees but not the fairgrounds staff? Does it include part time employment? I want to understand these numbers as we have had so much controversy about how to calculate Del Mar's employment numbers.
Staff Response: The employment figures in this table are provided by the State of California Employment Development Department (EDD). It is our understanding from the EDD that the employment numbers provided include both part-time and full-time employees within the City of Del Mar jurisdictional boundary, which includes employees at the Fairgrounds. The City is in the process of obtaining more detailed EDD data from 2018-2022, which will be helpful in better understanding these numbers.
3. Can the $34,267 in the tree reserve be used toward funding a comprehensive tree review?
Staff Response: The tree reserve is designated to be used for the planting of new trees throughout the City, especially in open space areas like parks and medians.
4. What is the $86,388 in the Open Space Acquisition fund--is this Quimby Act monies? What can it be used for?
1 April 17, 2023 Items 5,9,10
Staff Response: Staff does not know the history for creation of this fund, which would need to be further researched. However, these funds can be used for any cost related to acquiring open space for parks.
5. $262,410 is shown in the AB 939 fund at the end of June 2022, and the number climbs to $335,320 in 2023. Do we really have this much from 939? Is this state funded through the 939 program?
Staff Response: A small portion of the revenues received in this fund are from the State. The remaining large portion is related to the program revenues received from EDCO. At the end of the current year, or beginning of the next year, some of the funds will be used to implement the 3-bin system at City facilities, as required by EDCO. The upcoming two-year budget will also include other related expenditures that will reduce the balance in this fund.
6. Am I right that the table on page 202 shows we project a contingency reserve of
29.60% over revenues of $19,637,485? Would we have an "additional" $903,000+ to spend if we reduced the contingency to 25%?
Staff Response: The contingency reserve of 29.60% represents the ending GF contingency balance ($4.8M) over GF expenditures of $13.9M, plus other GF subsidies and City Hall Debt. If the contingency were reduced to 25%, there would be approximately $750,000 available for spending.
Item 10 - Coastal Connections Conceptual Planning Study Final Report, Public Feedback on Draft Design Concepts, and Recommendations for Further Evaluation
Please note that the following questions were provided to SANDAG by City staff to be addressed at the City Council meeting this evening.
1. Table 2-2 shows decreases in travel time for trains. Is this assuming relocation to a tunnel? Or, are the decreases due to other improvements?
2. Page 22 references that the relocation feasibility study is expected to be completed in 2022.--is it done? Or is this a typo and it should be 2023?
3. Page 22 states: "..evaluate whether infrastructure on the bluffs may need to be removed to ensure public safety and return the bluffs to a more natural state. And, also page 57/60 "Once the railroad is relocated off the bluffs, stakeholder agencies will assess the study area’s physical conditions and evaluate whether infrastructure on the bluffs may need to be removed to ensure public safety and return the bluffs to a more natural state." Didn't the CCC conditions require removal of the seawalls and restoration of the bluffs and beach?
2 April 17, 2023 Items 5,9,10
4. Page 19/60 reviews the Del Mar Community Plan and LCP. It should reference that the BPI is part of the city's certified LCP and has specific recommendations related to the RR.
5. Page 48/60 says: "Any projects located within the railroad right-of-way will require future agreements with NCTD for the City of Del Mar to assume responsibility for ongoing maintenance." This should state that future agreements with NCTD for ongoing maintenance will be required with an appropriate government or NGO. This could be Del Mar, but it could also be a number of other entities, including NCTD or SANDAG.
6. Page 54/60 states: "The at-grade crossing concepts developed in this study presume standard requirements for warning bells at the crossing and the routine sounding of train horns." Likewise the SANDAG slides state: "At-grade crossings FRA requires: – Audible warning systems at the crossing (lights & bells) – Train horns to be sounded at ¼ mile when approaching." A detailed proposal was submitted for a pilot program for an at grade crossing with locking gates or turnstiles that would NOT require bells and lights at an at grade crossing. It cited CPUC authorities for a pilot program. The proposers worked with SANDAG staff in preparing their analysis. SANDAG staff indicated it had potential merit.
If there is a reason SANDAG rejected it they should state the reason. One bullet in the updated slide deck isn't adequate: –" At-grade crossing with gate system."
7. SANDAG Slides Att. B: One says: "Specific extent of fencing to be determined in future phase by stakeholders & regulatory agencies" Do we know if the fencing for the crossing if it is at grade and safety fencing for the north-south trail will alleviate the need for the NCTD proposed safety fencing?
8. SANDAG Slides Att. B: One says: "Project team to visit SANDAG Social Services Technical Advisory Council (SSTAC) in January 2023 for additional input" Has this happened, and what was learned?
3 April 17, 2023 Items 5,9,10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Camilla Rang <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 8:37 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Mark STAC
Subject: In regards to overpass at 10th Street (or anywhere along the bluff) Attachments: IMG_0735.jpg; IMG_0742.JPEG; IMG_0743.JPEG 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 Del Mar City Council (and Mark Handzel),
The option of an overpass was dropped early in the study of how to get people across the rails on the bluff due to obstruction of views. A modern rail road overpass looks nothing like the sweet old wooden bridge that used to be at 10th street, neither does it look like the image Mark Handzel presented at the meeting (sorry, Mark), unless Mark knows something I don't. Solana Beach has several overpasses across the rail road and I am attaching pictures of one of them here. Because of safety issues so that people cannot jump off or throw thing down onto the train, these overpasses are humongous and ugly as h-ll. Please see attached images. No one wants these monsters outside their windows.
Best,
Camilla
1 April 17, 2023 Item 10
2 April 17, 2023 Item 10
3 April 17, 2023 Item 10
4 April 17, 2023 Item 10