Del Mar City Council
February 18, 2025

Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda
Del Mar Town Hall
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
February 18, 2025 City Council Meeting

INFORMATION RECEIVED

AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA

WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 Melinda Gould
From: CHARLES PINNEY <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 10:50 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Gene Swiech; Dolores Davies
Subject: Red Dot Letter for Item 1
Attachments: Del Mar Red Dot Item 1.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

This letter is submitted for the purpose of giving the city more information pertaining to fire prevention and mass casualty events in Del Mar.

Charles Pinney
February 18, 2025 Item 01
February 18, 2025 Item 01
February 18, 2025 Item 01
1 Melinda Gould
From: Camilla Rang <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2025 7:44 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: City Council meeting 02.18.25, Item 2
Attachments: blue print fo double tracking the bluff within home footprints.png 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,
My red dot letter is my letter to Sandag and their staff in regards to their value analysis and presentation, hoping it will inspire other Del Martians to do the same and write to [email protected]
Dear SANDAG Board members, Alternates and Lossan relocation staff, Before your staff’s presentation on February 28, I would like to make you observant on what the staff withheld from you in their Final Analysis Study Report in regards to relocation of the rail road off of the crumbling bluff in Del Mar.

As shocking as it sounds, an old, beaten up and formerly many times discarded option has been brought back to life – double track the crumbling bluff (alternative number 12). The study describes it as utilizing SANDAG’s Right of Way for the second set of rails. They say this without mentioning that there are houses on that Right of Way. Those houses will have to go, be demolished, families losing their multigenerational homes. The blue print lines for the planned eastern retaining wall show it is going through housing footprints but this is never mentioned. I am attaching the very page from the Value Analysis that shows it clearly.

Please discard this option and put it back into the graveyard from where it was dug up. This is a corpse that cannot be resuscitated. Additionally, you were granted 300 million dollars to study how to get the rails OFF the bluff. It is in clear violation of the grant contract to include how to keep the train ON the bluff within that study, using the California State Legislature AB180 dollars.

Also, again, I would like to remind you of the scandalous and corrupt cut of Route A from the staff’s suggestions for further analysis as soon as Solana Beach’s mayor, Lesa Heebner, became your chair. Lesa Heebner is a staunch opponent of Route A and tried a coup last fall to have Route A dismissed. That time she failed, much thanks to then-chair, Nora Vargas, who realized what was going on. Now, without Nora Vargas' brilliant leadership, the coup seemingly succeeded and Route A has been removed. We can only plead to your conscience and sense of what is right and wrong, and request that Route A is brought back for further study.

If you cannot do that, and it now is a free for all to discard routes that we find destructive to our own town or businesses, we in Del Mar request the removal of all routes that requires eminent domain. Those routes are #1- 9, 11-12, 15-16, on the Value Analysis. Left are number 10 (move line to I-5 from Oceanside to Sorrento Valley), #13 (Move freight traffic to I-15), #14 (Route A that was recently discarded). The staff also very February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 recently added the so called “yellow line”, that will find its way from the Fairground’s new platform and east towards I-5 via a train bridge on pillars. We can work with a version of that. Obviously not as it is suggested since it shows going along San Dieguito Drive right outside peoples’ windows, and in the protected lagoon, but the bridge can turn east at a more norther point and go over the empty lot, or tunnel under the lagoon/San Dieguito drive after the new platform, since sharp turns now seems to be OK with your staff, or even farther north along the northern part of the Fairground. There is still time to redesign the platform to fit that option.

In conclusion, if Solana Beach and The Fairground can choose to eliminate Route A, we in Del Mar request to eliminate all routes that will take eminent domain and these are the routes that we can continue work with and that will not offend anyone and we will all walk away as friends:
#10 (I-5 realignment between Oceanside and Sorrento Valley) #13 (Move freight traffic to along I-15, which will open up more passenger options over the Del Mar hill) # 17 (Train bridge on pillars (or tunnel) between the new Fairground platform and I-5, out of way from houses and lagoon)
The new platform should really be made public and open for all passenger rail traffic as a regular “trolley stop”, not offering or requiring parking. Anything else is an extremely unfair favoritism of the Fairground getting a 368 million tax dollar station only for them. Open up this station for the public.

Sincerely,
Camilla Rang
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 02
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Michael Deftos <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 12:43 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box; Terry TG. Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; Dan Quirk; John Spelichprivate Subject: Red dot regular meeting Item 2
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Honorable Mayor and Del Mar City Council,
Regarding the LOSSAN SDLRR Project and Value Analysis Study:

To the Mayor and City Council: Thank you for your tireless efforts to protect the city of Del Mar from adverse impacts from the railway realignment.

To the 22nd DAA and Solana Beach: The city of Del Mar has not betrayed you. It is not your enemy. It is merely trying to navigate the difficult situation of being a small city with increasing demands placed on it by the State and limited undeveloped land to accommodate these demands. We wish to be a partner in finding a solution to these demands that limits adverse impacts and benefits all interested parties to the greatest extent possible.

To the SANDAG engineering team: Thank you for your efforts to develop a satisfactory realignment. Here is my suggestion for further refinement of the yellow line:

Consider making the Events Platform at the Fairgrounds a regular train stop. Passenger trains will then all slow down and stop. This would increase passenger access to the Fairgrounds and Del Mar. There could be a sharp curve to the east after the platform, even if it were not a regular stop. The track could then continue along the bank of the San Dieguito River, descend to a tunnel portal near the Jimmy Durante Blvd Bridge, and continue under the San Dieguito Lagoon to under the I-5. The floodwall to protect the tracts as they descend after the platform could be engineered to also protect the Fairgrounds from flooding and sea level rise, providing the Fairgrounds an additional substantial benefit. The current track from the San Dieguito River Bridge to Del Mar could be repurposed as a walking and biking trail from the Fairgrounds to Del Mar and beyond, benefiting both the Fairgrounds and Del Mar with a fantastic pedestrian route between them. Solana Beach will not be impacted at all. The Los Penasquitos lagoon can be restored. There will be no tunnel portals in residential neighborhoods, no tunnels under homes, and the track can be removed from the bluffs. Perhaps this could be envisioned as the first step in a long-term goal of moving the entire railway away from the immediate coast, one hill at a time. Does the need for speed trump all the benefits such a route could provide? Will a minute or two of increased travel time from the train slowing down for the curve substantially impact ridership? Should any limited theoretical effect outweigh all the terrible impacts of the other routes? Seems like this could be a win-win-win to me.

Thanks for your consideration,
Michael Deftos
February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Torrey Pines Terrace, Del Mar
Red= Del Mar Fairgrounds Station
Yellow= Railway
Blue= Floodwall
Green= Pedestrian Trail
February 18, 2025 Item 02
City of Del Mar
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Clem Brown, Assistant City Manager
Via Ashley Jones, City Manager
DATE: February 18, 2025
SUBJECT: Staff Red Dot for Item 2: Presentation Regarding San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment Value Analysis Process and the San Dieguito Double Track and Special Events Platform Project
The PowerPoint presentation for Item 2 on the agenda for the February 18, 2025, City Council Meeting was not available when the agenda packet was published; however, it has been provided by SANDAG and is attached to this memorandum.

Attachment A: LOSSAN Presentation
February 18, 2025 Item 02
San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment
Informational Update
Del Mar City Council
February 18, 2025
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Agenda
| 2
Introduction
Staff Recommendation
What Did We Learn?
VA Alternative Concepts & Ideas
VA Study Overview
Next Steps
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Introduction
3 Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Value Analysis (VA) Study Overview
4 • Process, Phases, Participants
• VA Study Goal and Objectives
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 5
Value Analysis Study Process Overview
• Value Analysis (VA) is a technical study of project alternatives. • Study held workshops and meetings in September through December 2024.
• Collaborative and technically driven fresh look at alternative concepts and ideas that could address the challenges of climate change and the eroding Del Mar bluffs to provide reliable passenger and freight service.
• The ideas, suggestions, and alternative concepts developed and evaluated by the VA Study participants are presented in the Final Value Analysis Study Report.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
The Value
Methodology
(VM)
| 6
A systematic process used by a
multidisciplinary team, led by a qualified VM
Facilitator, to improve the value of a project,
product, process, service, or organization through
the analysis of functions.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
How we think
about value?
| 7
How Well?
Performance
How Long?
Time
How Certain?
Risk
How Much?
Cost
Value
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
VA Study Phases
| 8
Preparation
Interview
Stakeholders
Orient Participants
Visit Site
Review Objectives
Information
Analyze Information
Transform
Information
Function
Analysis
Define Functions
Allocate Resources
Prioritize Functions
Creativity
Generate Ideas
Evaluation
Evaluate Ideas
Prioritize Ideas
Development
Develop
Alternatives
Presentation
Present Information
Implementation
Elicit Feedback
Develop Consensus
2 3 4 5 6 7
Workshop
Week 1
Sep. 16-18
Workshop
Week 2
Sep. 30 - Oct. 2
Outbrief
Oct. 28
Midpoint
Review
Sep. 23
1 8
Feedback Mtg.

Dec. 20
Orientation
Sep. 11-12
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
VA Study Team
| 9
• 22nd District Agricultural Association
• Caltrans
• City of Carlsbad
• City of Del Mar
• City of Encinitas
• City of Oceanside*
• City of San Diego
• City of Solana Beach
• North County Transit District (NCTD)
• San Diego Metropolitan Transit System
(MTS)*
The following SANDAG Board of Directors member agencies and potentially affected jurisdictions were invited to participate in the VA Study. The VA Team was comprised of individuals with technical knowledge representing these stakeholders (listed in alphabetical order), and supported by additional subject matter experts:
*Opted not to participate in the VA Study
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 10
VA Study Project Goal
To maintain and enhance passenger and freight
service along the San Diego segment of the
LOSSAN rail corridor.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 11
VA Study Objectives

1. Improve rail service reliability by minimizing risks from climate change, including consideration of sea level rise, flooding, and the stability of the coastal bluffs.

2. Maintain passenger rail service to Solana Beach and Sorrento Valley and accommodate direct rail access to the 22nd District Agricultural Association (Del Mar Fairgrounds) while minimizing disruptions to passenger and freight service during construction.

3. Minimize impacts to existing homes, businesses, tourism, and major economic generators, including the Del Mar Fairgrounds, and transportation facilities during and after construction.

These objectives were developed collaboratively during the VA Study by VA participants. However, the participants did not reach unanimous consensus on the exact wording shown.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 12
VA Study Objectives

4. Avoid and/or minimize negative effects, and where possible enhance biological, cultural, and recreational resources of national, state, or local significance, including publicly owned parks, recreational trails, beaches, wetlands, ecological reserves, wildlife or waterfowl refuges, and any publicly or privately owned historic site listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

5. Help meet the goals of the Regional Plan and the California State Rail Plan by increasing passenger and freight train capacity, further reducing travel times, improving reliability, and considering existing and planned investments.

6. Improve coastal access and safety by eliminating at-grade railroad crossings and minimizing points of interaction between rail and all other modes of transportation.

7. Demonstrate good public stewardship by delivering the project in a timely way that considers prior investments, construction, right-of-way, operations, and maintenance costs.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
VA Alternative Concepts & Ideas
13 Based on work by VA Study participants
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Concept Ideas Generated
| 14
205 initial ideas
Brainstormed based on
functions to consider other
alignments and improvements
26 preliminary
evaluated concepts
Brainstormed based on
functions to consider other
alignments and improvements
16 alternatives
advance
13 new alignment alternatives
plus the 3 alignments will
advance to Week 2 of the
study to develop
* Results based on work by VA Study participants
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
VA Portals and Alignments
| 15
Figure 23. Conceptual Portal and Alignment Options
6 North Portals 10 Alignments 5 South Portals
*Alternatives are not labeled, named,
or ranked in order of preference
Reflects preliminary concepts as determined by VA Study participants Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 16
Summary of VA Alternative Concept ROM Costs
Alt.

No. Title
Estimated
Cost ($B)
1 MRI-01 Begin alignment south of San Dieguito bridge and run under Crest Canyon with 90 mph curves $3.8 - $5.0 2 MRI-04 Keep the tunnel profile above projected flooding elevation and eliminate sag $3.4 - $4.6 3 MRI-06 Relocate the southern portal south of existing pump station at Carmel Mt. Rd. $4.5 - $6.0 4 AW-01 Realign intersection at Jimmy Durante Blvd. and Camino Del Mar Not Developed* 5 AW-02 Shift north portal under Camino Del Mar $3.9 - $5.2 6 AW-05 Begin alignment south of San Dieguito Bridge and run under Crest Canyon w/ improved geometry $3.7 - $4.9 7 MH-01 Optimize the use of bridges and berms of Los Penasquitos Lagoon Not Developed* 8 MH-02 Shift alignment under Camino del Mar with 90 mph curves $3.6 - $4.8 9 MH-03 Shift the original Torrey Pines Rd. portal to the west 100-feet $3.3 - $4.4 10 IOC-01 Relocate LOSSAN corridor along I-5 from Oceanside to Sorrento Valley $34 - $45 11 IOC-02 Shift north portal to the Del Mar Train Station and run alignment parallel to Del Mar Bluffs $4.1 - $5.4 12 IOC-04 Stabilize bluffs and widen existing alignment to accommodate a second track $1.9 - $2.5 13 IOC-06 Relocate all freight rail along I-15 corridor $118 - $158 14 Proposed NOP Alternative Alignment A $6.9 - $9.2
15 Proposed NOP Alternative Alignment B $3.7 - $4.9
16 Proposed NOP Alternative Alignment C $3.3 - $4.4
*Preliminary rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost estimates were not developed for VA Alternative Concept Nos. 4 and 7, as these alternative concepts could be incorporated into several of the other alternative concepts that are under consideration Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Additional Ideas to Consider
| 17
Minimize
Community
Impacts
6 ideas
Minimize
Ecological
Impacts
4 ideas
Refine Project
Assumptions
4 ideas
Community
Betterment
2 ideas
* Results based on work by VA Study participants
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 18
Feedback on VA Alternative Concepts
VA Team participants provided feedback on:
• Alignments and portals
• Draft objectives
• Draft VA Study Report
No consensus on alternatives to carry forward into
environmental, but there was consensus on key themes
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
What Did We Learn?
19 Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 20
What Did We Learn?
Key themes and input that were incorporated into the draft revised objectives and alternative concepts developed as part of the VA Study include:
• Minimize effects to private properties, including subsurface easements
• Minimize disruptions to economic generators, such as the Del Mar Fairgrounds
• Demonstrate public stewardship by minimizing conflicts with prior and ongoing investments
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 21
What Did We Learn?
Interest was noted for the following for project concepts:
• Alignments located under Crest Canyon or Camino Del Mar or along I-5 • Alignments that do not require portals, including an option that would keep the railroad tracks on the bluffs
• Minimizing risks from climate change.
• Minimizing negative effects on biological resources, communities • Considerations on the cost of constructing and maintaining the project. • Reducing the maximum speed to allow for greater flexibility of alignments.

Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Staff Recommendations
22 Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 23
Key Considerations
• Staff recommendations include the project goal, objectives and range of alternative alignments to analyze in the Draft EIR.
• Key Themes
— Minimize effects to private properties, including subsurface easements — Minimize disruptions to economic generators, such as the Del Mar Fairgrounds — Demonstrate public stewardship by minimizing conflicts with prior and ongoing investments
• Preliminary staff proposed alternative concepts to consider:
— San Dieguito Bridge to I-5 Knoll
— Under Crest Canyon (Under Jimmy Durante to I-5 Knoll) — Under Camino Del Mar (Under Jimmy Durante to Torrey Pines Road West) — Del Mar Bluffs Double Track Reinforced
— No Build
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Preliminary Staff Proposed Alternatives
| 24
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Next Steps
25 Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Complete & Circulate
Draft EIR/EIS
Revise EIR & Circulate
Final EIR/EIS
Environmental Process
(CEQA/NEPA)
| 26
Technical
Studies
CEQA Scoping Meeting
(2024)
CEQA Notice of
Preparation (NOP)
(2024)
Public Input

NEPA/CEQA
Scoping
(2025)
Value Analysis
(2024)
SANDAG Board Direction
(2025)
WE
ARE
HERE
Public Input
Public Input
Public Input
Public Input
Public Input
Decision by SANDAG Board
& Federal Lead Agency
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
27 Stay connected with SANDAG
Explore our website
SANDAG.org
Email: [email protected]
Follow us on social media:
@SANDAGregion @SANDAG
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
San Dieguito Lagoon Double Track &
Special Events Platform (SDDT) Project
Project Updates
Del Mar City Council
February 18, 2025
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Special
Events
Platform
Introduction
| 29
Double Track Alignment
Bridge
Replacement
Special Events
Platform
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Project
Environmental
Clearance and
Outreach
History
Alternative Alignment Analysis
2010–2013
Public Outreach – Environmental Phase
2013–2016
Environmental Clearance
• FRA NEPA FONSI - 2016
• Resource Agency Permits - 2017
Additional Federal NEPA Clearance
• FTA NEPA CE - August 2022
• FRA NEPA Reevaluation - November 2024
On-Going Outreach – Design Coordination
• City of Del Mar Council – September 2021, February 2025 • City of Solana Beach Council – October 2024
• Del Mar Fairgrounds Boards – August 2021, August 2024 • Monthly/Quarterly Meetings with City and Del Mar Fairgrounds Staff Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Existing Single Track Timber Bridge
| 31
During King Tides
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
• 1,000-foot-long special events platform
• Accommodate a 10-car special events train
• 6’ wide ADA Walkways < 5% Slope
Special Events Platform
| 32
• 14-FT High Light Fixtures
• Railings with Mesh Fabric
• One Central Access Point
• Simplistic Design

ENTRANCE AT GRADE (BELOW PLATFORM)
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Artist Rendering of the Future Platform
| 33
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Artist Rendering of the New Bridge
| 34
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Improvements in the City of Del Mar
| 35
New Double
Track Bridge
Relocated
Water
Relocated
Sewer
Pedestrian
Path
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Stevens Creek Realignment
| 36
• Widens the mouth
of the San Dieguito
Lagoon
• Moves rail
alignment toward
fairgrounds
• Located as far
north as possible
Reclaim Stevens Creek
Low Flow Channel
New Box
Culvert
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Construction Access, and Laydown Areas
| 37
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Construction Laydown & Staging
| 38
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Construction
Access
| 39
Access 3
Access 4
Access 2
Access 1
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
| 40
On-Going Coordination with City of Del Mar
Encroachment Agreements
• Water and Sewer Relocation
• Pedestrian Path
• Laydown Area
License Agreements with NCTD
• Water and Sewer
• Pedestrian Undercrossing
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Project
Funding
Sources
• Federal Railroad Administration: $60.6M
• Federal Transit Administration: $18.1M
• State of California: $245.7M
— *TCEP
— TIRCP, SB125-TIRCP
— ITIP
• TransNet: $23.4M
Construction Funding Constraint
Request for Construction Funding Deadline – June 2025
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Anticipated
Project
Schedule
| 42
Complete 100% design
October 2024
Right of Way Certification
Early Spring 2025
Invitation for Bids
Anticipated by June 2025
Construction Award
December 2025
Construction
Early 2026 to Mid 2030
Construction Duration
4 ½ Years

WE ARE HERE
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
43 Stay connected with SANDAG
Explore our website
sandag.org/SDDT
Email:[email protected]
Follow us on social media:
@SANDAGregion @SANDAG
Attachment A February 18, 2025 Item 02
Red Dot DM City Council Meeting 2-18-25 SANDAG LOSSAN presentation 2/16/25
TO: Del Mar City Council
I am a 42 year resident of Del Mar. I look forward to a day when the train, tracks and seawalls are removed from the bluff/beach and public access is available.

Here are some of my thoughts as a Del Mar resident and not representing any other entity.

Of the 5 options tha SANDAG has put forth I believe that the “no project” and “double tracking the bluff” should not be considered at all. They are not consistent with CA Coastal Commission approval for the DMBS projects. That is, the seawalls and tracks are TEMPORARY.

Double tracking the bluff would be New Development, require more seawalls and therefore not consistent with the Coastal Act.

The new platform at the DM Fairgrounds must be maintained to provide access to the beach.

In addition any options that are subject to sea level rise and require flood walls must have appropriate mitigation and ensure the protection of coastal resources, public access and safety.

NO DEL MAR HOMES SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO EMINENT DOMAIN.

I ALSO STRONGLY RECOMMEND A ROUTE THAT WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE FAIRGROUNDS ACTIVITIES AND THAT WOULD IN TURN JEOPARDIZE THE ABiLITY FOR

DM AND THE FAIRGROUNDS TO WORK OUT A SOLUTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THE FAIRGROUNDS.

IT IS OF TANTAMOUNT IMPORTANCE IN MY OPINION THAT THE SOUTH AND NORTH BLUFFS ARE PRESERVED AND NOT UP ZONED.IF THE CITY IS DENIED BUILDING HOUSING ON THE FAIRGROUNDS THEN THE BLUFFS ARE AT RISK OF DEVELOPMENT.

Thank you,
Udo Wahn, M.D.

Stratford Court
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: angelina neglia <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 3:28 PM
To: Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; John Spelich; Dan Quirk; Ashley Jones Cc: Ralph Hicks; City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Letters to review from the Coalition for Safer Trains before the Feb 28th, 2025 Board meeting
Attachments: SANDAG ltr Feb 28 2025.pdf; 11625climateactionlettertohouseleadership.pdf 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 Team, Please can you submit this letter for Tuesday night’s council meeting. I will also speak. Thanks Angie >> Dear SANDAG Board Executives and Council Members,
>>
>> Please find attached a letter from the Coalition for Safer Trains along with a letter from Congressman Levin to review before your meeting on Feb 28th 2025 when discussing and making any decisions regarding the LOSSAN Corridor and impact on coastal communities. We thank you for your consideration. >>
>> Thank you,
>> Angelina
>>
>>
>> Angelina Neglia
>> Healthcare/Educational Advocate
>> [email protected]
>> (858) 945 8827
>> CALTash 2024 Recipient, Advocating for People with Disabilities >> 2024 Nominee, Senator Blakespear’s “Women Who Inspire” in our Community >>
>>
>>
>
February 18, 2025 Item 02
January 16, 2025
The Honorable Mike Johnson
Speaker
U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Hakeem Jeffries
Democratic Leader
U.S. House of Representatives
H-204, The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Speaker Johnson and Leader Jeffries,
Over the past several years, we have made significant progress in addressing the climate crisis, investing in the clean energy economy, lowering energy costs, and protecting public health.

These investments are delivering tangible benefits for families and workers across the country, including in the districts we represent. As Members of Congress, we stand ready to defend these hard-fought gains and, importantly, to keep working together to address the climate crisis with the urgency it demands. In the 119th Congress, we urge you to build on these investments and improve the lives of the American people, while ensuring that the United States remains a global leader in energy, technology, and manufacturing.

The climate crisis is a present and future danger to public health and well-being, national security, and the economy. Climate pollution is exacerbating health challenges and limiting quality of life for families across the country, especially in communities historically overburdened by pollution. Every fraction of a degree of warming increases the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events – the climate crisis is fueling increasingly severe floods and storms, ravaging wildfires, extreme drought and water shortages, heatwaves, and sea level rise.

All of these catastrophes threaten lives, put our communities and infrastructure at risk, and cost the American taxpayers. The United States now experiences, on average, a billion-dollar weather or climate disaster every three weeks.

The progress we’ve made is delivering real results for our constituents and communities across the United States. Over the past several years, federal climate and clean energy policies have helped lower energy costs for consumers and reduce pollution while delivering important cobenefits for air and water quality as well as public health. We have helped create more than 334,000 clean energy jobs in the past two years – with $161 billion invested specifically in Republican Congressional districts – and are projected to support approximately 1.5 million jobs in the next decade. Over the past four years, we have kickstarted an unprecedented revival of American manufacturing and catalyzed nearly $1 trillion in private sector investments in the clean energy economy that has been embraced by industry and our global partners. We cannot afford to reverse course.

We have proven that ambitious, consumer-driven climate policies can simultaneously address the climate crisis and build a stronger economy, strengthen U.S. competitiveness abroad, and bolster our nation’s national and energy security. Under Democratic leadership and an all-ofgovernment approach to tackling the climate crisis, we have turbocharged the clean energy economy nationwide, accelerated new domestic manufacturing, cut health-harming climate pollution across sectors, and invested in our most vulnerable and disadvantaged communities.

These efforts have fortified U.S. energy independence, reduced reliance on adversarial nations for critical resources, and spurred transformative investments in renewable energy and zeroFebruary 18, 2025 Item 02 emission transportation. By investing in equitable climate solutions, we are also investing in our national security and ability to address challenges head-on.

The real-world costs of undoing the progress we have made are devastating and far-reaching. By investing in a modernized, clean energy economy we have delivered on lower energy costs and diversified our energy supply while building community and infrastructure resilience. We have an obligation to future generations — and to ourselves— to not only defend that progress, but to continue to reduce global emissions and avoid the worst harms of climate change. We are committed to continue lowering costs for families, transitioning our economy to the 21st century, and building our resilience to climate threats.

We are united in our determination to protect the progress we’ve made and will continue to work in the 119th Congress to bolster American competitiveness and national security while striving to achieve clean air, clean water, livable communities, and a healthy planet for all.

Sincerely,
Mike Levin
Member of Congress
Pramila Jayapal
Member of Congress
Kathy Castor
Member of Congress
Scott H. Peters
Member of Congress
Paul D. Tonko
Member of Congress
Summer L. Lee
Member of Congress
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Member of Congress
John Garamendi
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Delia C. Ramirez
Member of Congress
Troy A. Carter, Sr.

Member of Congress
Seth Moulton
Member of Congress
Jan Schakowsky
Member of Congress
Juan Vargas
Member of Congress
Sean Casten
Member of Congress
Jimmy Panetta
Member of Congress
Jim Costa
Member of Congress
Shri Thanedar
Member of Congress
Julia Brownley
Member of Congress
Steve Cohen
Member of Congress
Jennifer L. McClellan
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Raja Krishnamoorthi
Member of Congress
Kevin Mullin
Member of Congress
Alma S. Adams, Ph.D.

Member of Congress
Sara Jacobs
Member of Congress
Nikema Williams
Member of Congress
Eric Sorensen
Member of Congress
Mark Takano
Member of Congress
Nanette Diaz Barragán
Member of Congress
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Member of Congress
Brittany Pettersen
Member of Congress
Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr.

Member of Congress
Jerrold Nadler
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Rashida Tlaib
Member of Congress
Emanuel Cleaver, II
Member of Congress
Suzanne Bonamici
Member of Congress
Bradley Scott Schneider
Member of Congress
Chrissy Houlahan
Member of Congress
Nydia M. Velázquez
Member of Congress
Maxine Waters
Member of Congress
Jamie Raskin
Member of Congress
Betty McCollum
Member of Congress
Haley M. Stevens
Member of Congress
Frederica S. Wilson
Member of Congress
Jared Huffman
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Sarah Elfreth
Member of Congress
Doris Matsui
Member of Congress
Mark DeSaulnier
Member of Congress
Valerie P. Foushee
Member of Congress
Kim Schrier, M.D.

Member of Congress
Al Green
Member of Congress
Scion of the Enslaved
Africans -
Sacrificed to Make America
Great
Stephen F. Lynch
Member of Congress
Linda T. Sánchez
Member of Congress
LaMonica McIver
Member of Congress
Nikki Budzinski
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Seth Magaziner
Member of Congress
André Carson
Member of Congress
Mike Quigley
Member of Congress
Brendan F. Boyle
Member of Congress
George Latimer
Member of Congress
Sharice L. Davids
Member of Congress
Madeleine Dean
Member of Congress
Mark Pocan
Member of Congress
Morgan McGarvey
Member of Congress
Jill Tokuda
Member of Congress
Sydney Kamlager-Dove
Member of Congress
Bill Foster
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Chris Deluzio
Member of Congress
Melanie Stansbury
Member of Congress
Chellie Pingree
Member of Congress
Sylvester Turner
Member of Congress
Jake Auchincloss
Member of Congress
Becca Balint
Member of Congress
Yvette D. Clarke
Member of Congress
Yassamin Ansari
Member of Congress
Salud Carbajal
Member of Congress
Ro Khanna
Member of Congress
Dwight Evans
Member of Congress
Ami Bera, M.D.

Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Maxine Dexter
Member of Congress
Gabe Amo
Member of Congress
Deborah K. Ross
Member of Congress
Greg Casar
Member of Congress
Dan Goldman
Member of Congress
James P. McGovern
Member of Congress
Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.

Member of Congress
Maxwell Alejandro Frost
Member of Congress
Andrea Salinas
Member of Congress
Josh Gottheimer
Member of Congress
Ilhan Omar
Member of Congress
Mary Gay Scanlon
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Robert C. "Bobby" Scott
Member of Congress
Sylvia R. Garcia
Member of Congress
Jonathan L. Jackson
Member of Congress
Dina Titus
Member of Congress
Steny H. Hoyer
Member of Congress
Bennie G. Thompson
Member of Congress
Teresa Leger Fernández
Member of Congress
Ed Case
Member of Congress
Diana DeGette
Member of Congress
Val Hoyle
Member of Congress
Ayanna Pressley
Member of Congress
Gerald E. Connolly
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Lucy McBath
Member of Congress
Robert J. Menendez
Member of Congress
Danny K. Davis
Member of Congress
Gwen S. Moore
Member of Congress
Derek Tran
Member of Congress
Hillary J. Scholten
Member of Congress
Greg Stanton
Member of Congress
Mikie Sherrill
Member of Congress
Marilyn Strickland
Member of Congress
February 18, 2025 Item 02
www.safertrain.org
February 28th, 2025
Dear Mario Orso, CEO SANDAG, and Members of the SANDAG Board, Subject Item, 351 Mile LOSSAN Project and SANDAG Value Analysis; The Coalition for Safer Trains has reviewed SANDAG’s Value Analysis producing 16 Rail Alternatives, then a few days later released a short list of 5 Rail Alternatives to be presented to the SANDAG Board on February 28th, 2025 Board Meeting. We ask why these 5 rail alignments were added at the last moment.

Are we to assume this new short list of 5 rail alignments didn’t all go through the Value Analysis process for the past seven months. Our observation in this new Short List of Alignments, the first two are modifications of Options B and C from the originals in the SANDAG NOP, and the third option is a modification of Option A from the original NOP, which is a combination of SANDAG’s ideas and Option A proposed by the Coalition for Safer Trains to SANDAG. • We want to be clear, the only acceptable option, is an I-5 alignment, somewhere north of Del Mar’s residential neighborhoods.

Our grassroots group represents the Coastal Cities and thousands of tax paying Citizens from Oceanside down to San Diego. We appreciate all the hard work your team has done thus far. We need to emphasize based on the SANDAG Value Analysis it is evident once again the SANDAG Criteria only represents the needs and goals of SANDAG and Rail Stakeholders. There is no mention or importance of the safety of the community, economic or environmental impacts, limiting pollution in the community, or Eminent Domain of resident’s homes or businesses. There is no cost benefit analysis based on costs, value and ridership numbers justifying spending billions of dollars building infrastructure in a floodplain and under homes. See Published population numbers at the end of this letter. See SANDAG’s Goals below.
“Improving resiliency and safety tops the list of reasons we are identifying and implementing solutions. Additionally, these solutions further the goals of the California State Rail Plan and SANDAG Regional Plan to increase track capacity, reduce travel times, and provide more service. The resulting increase in ridership will support local, state, and national economies and help us meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board.” Source; www.SANDAG.org
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Based on SANDAG’s stated goals and the short list of 5 alignments proposed on Feb 10th 2025, this is not a serious effort to find a resolution which doesn’t destroy Del Mar. Three of your five options; Crest Canyon, Camino Del Mar, and Bluff Double Track Options disproportionately destroy Del Mar. These options will take resident’s homes by eminent domain, take small businesses and financially impact the City and Hotels, limit revenue, tax income, and eliminate property taxes of the home owners that lose their homes. The city will go bankrupt due to the north end of the city being sealed off for over a decade due to the destruction. The economic and environmental damage to the city will be irreparable.

The Coalition for Safer Trains requested from SANDAG a list of freight train tunnels under urban communities in the United States. SANDAG provided 11 tunnel examples, all were in rural areas, and the tunnels were all built between 1898-1911. Del Mar would be the only City in the Unites States with freight trains running under homes! The freight trains are longer than Del Mar. We are all aware of the numerous derailment accidents and risks; East Palestine Ohio, and Sandusky Ohio derailments and toxic spills. Years later these towns are still impacted, suffering economically and environmentally. The residents suffer many health illnesses due to the toxic spill. This is unacceptable when there are safer options for our communities.

Initial Comments by the Coalition for Safer Trains
• 14 of the 16 Rail Alignments in the Value Analysis SANDAG recommended propose using the new trestle bridge. This shows a preference for the bridge to be built, instead of delayed until the proper EIR is done for this entire 351-LOSSAN Rail project, which the bridge and platform are part of. The Bridge should not drive the alignment decision. The bridge never went through the full EIR Studies, as it stated it was passed as an existing structure with the Event Platform included. Our Coalition asked SANDAG repeatedly where the existing platform is, and are still awaiting a response. All of SANDAG’s public documents state this bridge is part of the 351-mile LOSSAN Corridor, which is one large project. SANDAG cannot break up this rail corridor to minimize the environmental impact to get piece-mealed projects passed. When this Trestle Bridge was illegally passed only for the benefit of the Fairgrounds and Rail Stakeholders, it was over a decade ago, and it should be obvious our climate and storm activity has increased. It is not prudent to spend millions of dollars on new construction that will last over 100 years in the floodplain, over a river mouth, next to the ocean impacting the tidal currents, clogging the lagoon.
• I-5 and I-15 Alignments; The Coalition for Safer Trains submitted three I-5 alignments to SANDAG that bring the rail from Oceanside to Sorrento Valley. These alternatives, could be implemented in phases. They all utilize public land, no eminent domain, no portals, no tunnels, no pollution spewed into the community and no infrastructure in lagoon. These I-5 alignments show the rail is literally 1000 to 2000 feet away from the I-5. We tried to present these to the SANDAG Engineering Team on December 16th, but they cancelled the meeting the day before, then SANDAG had an internal meeting Dec 20th to winnow down the alignments. • The I-15 alignment Option could connect from the Barstow Freight Multi-Model Depot down to the Port of San Diego and Border to carry freight. This line could also be built to carry the Coaster Train for Passenger service for inland commuters on the I-15 to alleviate the vehicular traffic on the I-15. Due to the topography the I-15 alignment would need to be a combination of putting the rail underground, on a berm or next to, in the middle or over the freeway. There is February 18, 2025 Item 02
definitely more open space (not near homes) to utilize along the I-15 than putting double tracking and tunnels under densely populated coastal towns. It should also be considered the I15 alignment could swing south through Escondido near or through a straightened Miramar Hill section, to Miramar for the Military then connecting to the I-5 corridor. Putting the rail alignment down the I-5 or the I-15 meets the criteria that SANDAG and Rail Stakeholders have said are the priorities in your weighted criteria, NOP and Value Analysis, which are; speed by eliminating curves, reduce travel times, safety (eliminating road grade crossings), efficiency, sustainability, and increase track capacity/profits.

Below Is the Response from The Coalition for Safer Trains for The 5 Alignment Short List Just Released:
• Under Crest Canyon (Under Jimmy Durante to I-5 Knoll): Realigned to minimize subsurface easements by routing below Crest Canyon (Was Option B in July NOP, 2024) Coalition for Safer Trains Response: This Route Title doesn’t convey the gravity of destruction to Del Mar. This Option doesn’t let the public know SANDAG will build the North Portal one block from the center of town, on Jimmy Durante Blvd. This Option proposes demolishing 7-10 acres of land, taking 35-50 homes and businesses by Eminent Domain to build the highly destructive Cut and Cover Tunnel which meets up with a tunnel boring machine right under homes, then continues south under the entire length of Del Mar. When the destruction and construction is complete SANDAG will rebuild Jimmy Durante Blvd. and install a 20-foot-high berm along Jimmy Durante, so the resident’s left living along JD, Christie Lane, Heather Lane, and David Way will be looking directly into a Berm! House values will plumet. As stated, and documented by SANDAG approximately 2,700 Residents will suffer continuously from Severe Noise, Pollution, and Ground Borne Vibration in their bodies, and Vibration damage to their homes.

Jimmy Durante is the only access into and out of Del Mar (except for 101) to the north and is the only Evacuation Route North. This will be shut down for over a decade, cutting Del Mar off from the Fairgrounds business, beach access and tourism. This closure will also cut off access for First Responders, and the Fire Department. We have spoken with the Fire Chief and they do not know how to access Del Mar if this Option is chosen. Even if SANDAG moves Jimmy Durante over to where the tracks lay today, and build the road higher as it is in a floodplain, this construction will destroy Del Mar and homes are still taken by Eminent Domain. If the road is built higher on a berm, it will impact the residents that are left, looking directly into it. This construction and closure will financially impact the city, small businesses, hotels, beach access and tourism to the point of bankruptcy.

This option places the portal and double tracks in the floodplain. This alignment traverses the entire length of town through the fragile hillside from the north to the south. There won’t be any air shafts to push out the toxic pollutants along the entire tunnel. SANDAG has stated they will require Ventilation Buildings located at each portal running ventilation fans 24/7 spewing toxic pollutants out to the homes nearby, within feet! Emergency routes out of the tunnel will also be impacted. The noise, vibration and toxicity are not acceptable to any city when there are safer options.

No City Council Member or the SANDAG Board Members would approve this destruction being done to your city or the taking or your resident’s homes and small businesses. What happens to the homes nearby who are literally feet above the tunnel and suffer damage from vibration, slab crack, sink holes, erosion, hydrology issues from water run off down the hill hitting a horizontal cut and cover tunnel? This option does not mention the litigation from home owners from Eminent Domain, ROW Costs, Easement February 18, 2025 Item 02
Costs, project delays, inflation, which will increase the real cost due to law suits and cost of materials and equipment. This option doesn’t include the risks and costs associated with tunnel boring under the entire town of Del Mar. This option doesn’t include the extra construction costs for building and armoring the Bridge, Portal (Flood gates, and Flood Walls), and Tracks from flooding and ongoing increased maintenance being in the flood plain, as it is susceptible to the ground water rising as well.

We understand these alignments will go through a thorough Environmental Study, but with these immense issues why would SANDAG further this option in any study? • Under Camino Del Mar (Under Jimmy Durante to Torrey Pines Road West): Aligned to minimize subsurface easements by following below Camino Del Mar (Was Option C in the July NOP, 2024)
Coalition for Safer Trains Response: SANDAG will build the North Portal (same location as the North Portal for Option B), one block from the center of town, on Jimmy Durante Blvd, and demolish 7-10 acres of land, taking 35-50 homes and businesses by Eminent Domain. Jimmy Durante is the main access into and out of Del Mar (except 101) to the north and is the only Evacuation Route north. This Option will be shut down the northern access into and out of Del Mar for over a decade, cutting it off from the Fairground business, beach access and tourism. This closure will also cut off access for First Responders, and the Fire Department. This closure will financially and economically impact the city, hotels and small businesses to the point of bankruptcy. This option puts the portal next to homes, and double tracks in the floodplain which will involve flood gates, and U Structure, and increased maintenance due to ground water rising, unless it is built on a 20-foot-high berm, which impacts the homeowners facing it.

SANDAG states this is under Jimmy Durante but doesn’t explain this involves the highly destructive cut and cover tunnel which demolishes the north end of town, one block from the center. This alignment also proposes boring a tunnel under the entire length of the commercial district of Del Mar’s main street and homes, from south to north.

There is no mention about the risks of boring a tunnel under the entire length of Del Mar, which include the boring machine breaking down underground. You cannot go underground to repair the front of a tunnel boring machine. It involves digging a separate large shaft, causing vibration damage and sink holes in the surrounding area. The destruction will be immense, and the north end of Del Mar will be demolished from both tunnel constructions as they meet up underground very close to homes. The South Portal located at Torrey Pines Road West Portal, is just as destructive. It will impact the lowincome apartments and condominiums, which have underground parking and disrupt the south access and only entrance into Del Mar along the coast for a decade, if the project was on time and didn’t run into any obstacles or delays! SANDAG Engineers are purposely keeping information regarding the risks of tunneling, and boring under a densely populated town out of the reports they would have you review. This option destroys Del Mar from the North and the South, and isolates the city.

It is ironic that Solana Beach and the Fairgrounds complaints are based on “disruption to operations, traffic and dust”. We wish that is all Del Mar would have to suffer. If there are ventilation shafts throughout town then they will be spewing toxic pollutants directly into the town 24/7, bringing the pollution right into the center of town. If the Ventilation Buildings are located at each end of this tunnel, then it will push the toxic pollutants 24/7, out to the residents located feet away from the building. No City Council Member or SANDAG Board Member would want to do this to their city, their small businesses or impose eminent domain on their resident’s when there is a safer option.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
• San Dieguito Bridge to I-5 Knoll: Aligned to minimize impacts to Del Mar, the Fairgrounds, and San Dieguito Double Track Bridge (Was a version of Option A in the SANDAG NOP, July 2024) Coalition for Safer Trains Response: This option originated from SANDAG’s various I-5 alignments over the past two decades, and the Coalition for Safer Tains Option A in the SANDAG July NOP 2024 short list. This option should be reconsidered in this short list of recommendations. This alignment would destroy sensitive Tier 1 habitat in the restored San Dieguito Lagoon and hiking trails along the lagoon and is unacceptable for those reasons. A revised version of this route would be acceptable if moved north of the river and under the lagoon. The Fairgrounds Special Event Platform could be built as planned. Solana Beach would be unaffected by the realignment. No, Del Mar homes or businesses would be adversely affected. This proposed above ground route with a shorter tunnel under the lagoon is less expensive than the other SANDAG recommended options. Option 14 in the VA should be a SANDAG recommended route and additional versions of this route should be studied.

Option A proposed by the Coalition for Safer Trains, proposed lowering the train into a tunnel in the Solana Beach Trench as it will be excavated to be double tracked. The entire trench would be covered with a 6+ acre Solana Park. The city would not be bifurcated anymore! Lesa Heebner the Mayor of Solana Beach and Chair of the SANDAG Board publicly stated this alignment should be eliminated due to the disruption to business, traffic and dust in their city. She also stated publicly Option A would close the rail service during construction, demolish homes on the east side of the trench, and destroy Cedros design district. This is all untrue. Our Coalition took her comments seriously and asked SANDAG to clarify this construction in the Trench. SANDAG Engineers provided our Coalition with the design drawings showing how SANDAG would keep a rail line in service in the trench while straightening the sides of the trench and building the other track in the trench. The trench would not be wider, as she has erroneously stated. See photo below of transition from double to single track in SB Trench. SANDAG Engineers also confirmed train service would not be disrupted during construction. Mayor Heebner only has to ask SANDAG for the design drawings showing how they keep a rail line in service while excavating the trench and she will see SANDAG only straightens the sides of the trench to accommodate double tracking. The train would go into a tunnel in the trench, then would be 140 feet underground before it goes under Via de la Valle, under the river, around the Fairgrounds Property, or under the southern-most area of the Fairgrounds parking lot then under the lagoon out to the I-5. The Fairgrounds could have their Event Platform at the south eastern perimeter of the property, so it is more accessible, and the public could use it, and it is away from the ocean rising sea level.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
The tunnel proposed in Option A from the Coalition for Safer Trains running under San Dieguito Lagoon, no/minimal impact to natural resources/aesthetics. Remove track from Los Penasquitos Lagoon (or convert to bike path). No eminent domain, no pollution spewing into homes or coastal communities, no portals near homes and no tunnels under homes. This option doesn’t seal off the north end of Del Mar, doesn’t need the bridge (save $386M), doesn’t put infrastructure into the lagoon, doesn’t interfere with the Fairgrounds if a tunnel is utilized, and utilizes public land. This Option needs to be reconsidered and included in the short list of option again.

The New San Dieguito Bridge to I-5 Knoll (in the short list from SANDAG), a modified version of Option A from the SANDAG July, 2024 NOP.

Coalition for Safer Trains Response: This alignment (the southern yellow line) would involve the Solana Beach Trench to be double tracked, utilizes the new trestle bridge, then takes a south eastern curve around the perimeter of the Fairgrounds at the edge of the parking lot, utilizes NCTD public land towards Jimmy Durante Blvd. where the Event Platform could be located and perhaps public could access. The track would be elevated over Jimmy Durante Blvd. then the track continues along the edge of the lagoon, along Race Track View Drive. With this alignment homes on Race Track View Drive will be impacted by noise, vibration, pollution and view impacts. The tracks will literally be 100 yards from homes. This option should be reconsidered and modified to consider the other yellow route located more northern in the photo below. From the southern end of the Trestle Bridge to the I-5 transportation corridor is 1.24m. During the Environmental study SANDAG could consider a tunnel from Jimmy Durante to the I-5 under the lagoon. This alternative moves the tracks more north, so it doesn’t impact the homes on Race Track View Drive.
https://www.sandag.org/-/media/SANDAG/Documents/PDF/projects-and-programs/featuredprojects/lossan-rail-improvements-del-mar-bluffs/del-mar-bluffs-stabilization/alignment-alternativesand-environmental-constraints-study-2017-appendices-2023-09-08.pdf February 18, 2025 Item 02
Other Ideas for Consideration: A permanent Del Mar/Fairgrounds Station provides year-round access to the Fairgrounds, and dictates that passenger trains must slow down which provides for the curve to the east. This might allow Solana Beach to terminate and sell the station as it is not open today, as ticketing machines are used, it is now used only as a public bathroom. It could be used for something more profitable for Solana Beach.

The Affordable Housing at the Fairgrounds, and housing at Watermark would increase ridership. With the 20ft tract elevation at the new SDR bridge, 1500 ft to JDB bridge = 30-foot descent at 2% grade = - 10ft at the JDB bridge. If necessary, the new high JDB could be constructed east of the current one, (an improvement since the current bridge is below the floodplain). This could help protect the Fairgrounds from flooding for Alt B/C has no other function and will be a visual blight.

Repurpose the track through the North Commercial District to Del Mar into a walking/bike path, which also provides better access between Fairgrounds and Del Mar. Potential bike path all the way to Sorrento Valley (and UCSD with current path that parallels I-5). This could be viewed as a first step in multi-step process of moving the track to parallel I-5 (one hill at a time). It should be noted any railroad tracks running through coastal communities where the rail line will be removed, might be sold, as this land would be valuable to repurpose. These funds could be used to fund other projects for the rail roads. As SANDAG promotes biking to work, and getting cars off the freeways, this could be a real first step towards making this goal happen.

Red = Del Mar/Fairgrounds year-round station
Yellow – Railway
Blue = Floodwall
Green – Bike/Walking Path
February 18, 2025 Item 02
• Del Mar Bluffs Double Track Reinforced: Maintains current alignment, adds double track along the bluffs and through Los Penasquitos Lagoon with bluff reinforcement and more robust seawalls.

Coalition for Safer Trains Response: The goal of California State Assembly Bill AB180 was to get the tracks off the Del Mar Bluff. AB180 allocated $300 Million to do the studies needed for this. It defies logic that double-tracking the Bluff is in the scope released on in the short list of 5 Rail Alignments.

Moreover, double-tracking on the Bluff was rejected in the Programmatic-level EIR in 2007.

The Bluff is intrinsically unstable. It is full of groundwater year-round that percolates through the soil and face of the Bluff from the east and from uphill. The entire hill of Del Mar suffers these hydrology and drainage issues, and thus has sinkholes, fissures, and documented cliff failures. This is chronic and continues to worsen with increased rain and storm activity, atmospheric rivers, and sea level rise. The Bluffs Double Track option will destroy the already fragile bluffs, beach and will encroach and take homes by eminent domain as the homes are literally a few feet from the tracks. This is unacceptable for any City to absorb.

From the 2007 PEIR: “Attempting to stabilize the fragile coastal bluffs would require major construction efforts, including a seawall 10 to 20 feet high at the base of the bluffs, retaining walls within the trench itself, and tie-backs at the top of the bluffs, resulting in drastic changes to the existing environment.” Given this situation why would double-tracking the tracks ON the Bluff be included in the upcoming environmental studies? Double tracking was rejected in the 2007 PEIR.

In 2022, The Coastal Commission said firmly and clearly:

No more Bluff Stabilization after the project that is underway right now. Everything must be removed within 30 years.
• No Build: Includes continuation of major stabilization efforts that would be required to protect the existing single-track alignment. This was addressed in the previous section. See photo below bluff erosion in Nantucket Coastline from 2003. The erosion is real.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
Background for new SANDAG Board Members:

Executive Departures; July 2024, newly appointed CEO Mario Orso dismissed Ray Major, who served as SANDAG’s and Chief Economist. This move was part of Mr. Orso’s initiative to restructure the agency’s leadership. July 2023, Hasan Ikhrata announced his resignation as SANDAG’s CEO, effective December 29, 2023. His tenure was marked by divisive leadership and various controversies. November 2023, Lauren Warrem, SANDAG’s Director of Finance and Accounting was terminated. She subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging her dismissal was retaliatory after she raised concerns about systematic issues with the SR-125 toll operation system.

This issue still continues. Audits and Investigations; In December 2024, SANDAG announced that the U.S Attorney’s Office for Southern District of California and the FBI concluded their investigation into the Agency’s contracting activities without filing federal criminal charges. Internal Audit on SR-125 Tolling.

An internal audit revealed mismanagement in the SR-125 tolling system, including significant revenue losses due to system errors and oversight failures. Now we have learned that Danny Veeh, Manager of the LOSSAN Project has been demoted from the LOSSAN Rail Project and Maria Rodriguez, Director of Mega Projects is now in charge.

LAFCO; We have now learned that The San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) which is an independent government body established by the State of California in 1963, which oversees and manages the boundaries and service areas of nearly 100 local government agencies within San Diego County has opened up an investigation into SANDAG. The Commission is responsible for providing regional growth management services, ensuring that development aligns with community needs and resources. LAFCO plans and regulates the service and areas of local governmental agencies, ensuring and promoting transparency and community involvement in local governance. Through it regulatory and planning efforts, LAFCO plays a crucial role in shaping the region’s development, ensuring that growth is managed responsibly and services are delivered effectively to meet the needs of the county’s residents.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
The Coalition for Safer Trains has provided SANDAG with 3 different I-5 Alignments, an I-15 Alignment and Route A Alignment (which is in the July 2024 NOP. Our Coalition also provided a Solution called Fr8Way, A Multi-Modal Autonomous Electric Freight System which utilizes the air over the freeway. It could be built over the I-15 freeway from the Barstow Freight Depot down to the Port of San Diego and the Border. Congestion on our freeways still persists, even though lanes have been added as a band-aid. Adding lanes is not a generational forward-thinking long-term idea, when there are more technologically advanced and environmentally friendly options available. The overall RTP Regional Transportation Plan should be reviewed as Billions have been spent and we still don’t have one cohesive transit plan in San Diego, or North & East Counties. When will SANDAG think about and design a transit plan to put rail near where the commuters live or where the businesses are located and utilize the transportation corridors and new technology for our future generations.

Pollution and Green House Gas Emissions; All of the SANDAG Board Members along with government agencies and officials including Senator Blakespear, and Congressman Levin are proponents of lowering green-house gas emissions, and limiting pollution. See Attached Letter from Congressman Levin. We have heard the Board Members discuss this issue in your meetings to help protect your communities.

Yet SANDAG Engineers propose to put trains and pollution in the center of communities, when they could be routed outside of communities.

Trains are the second largest polluters behind planes. Why would SANDAG propose putting rail lines into communities, and build the new trestle bridge where you will increase passenger trains from 44 to 111 and freight trains from 6 to 14 per day, and triple the pollution in the communities. Putting freight trains carrying toxic chemicals and ammunitions under homes is unacceptable. This pollution will be spewing out of the diesel trains and out of portals next to homes 24/7 and the pollution will float from the new bridge (which will have flood gates, and flood walls) across the Fairground attendees and coastal communities. How is the huge investment helping the community? It will obviously impact the community!
As SANDAG states, “help us meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board.”
SANDAG should be considering solutions which truly are environmentally forward thinking to lower green-house gas emissions for our future generations. The Coalition for Safer Trains presented to SANDAG, “Fr8Way”, a Zero Emission, Autonomous, Electric Elevated Multi Model Freight Moving System. It can be built fast at it is like Lego in modular sections. But SANDAG didn’t show interest in this Green Environmentally friendly Option.

Our part in this should be to respectfully encourage Senator Catherine Blakespear and Congressman Levin to direct the next tranche of LOSSAN funding to OCTA for the studies they need to do in San Clemente. And we should encourage Joe LaCava to support this, since there’s no value in digging a tunnel in our San Diego portion of LOSSAN if we lose the connection through Orange County.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
The way Del Mar has been treated with respect to the rail alignment selection process is a harbinger of how small cities will be treated by transit organizations as nature forces infrastructure to move inland.

Much as we love Del Mar, there is even more at stake than only Del Mar in demanding a fair and transparent process. It is not acceptable to have a few individuals in Solana Beach and the Fairgrounds Board Members who are all on term limits), demand Del Mar be demolished and dictate that 50 homes and small businesses can be demolished by eminent domain to suit their purposes, just to further their aspirations. The aggressive way Mayor Heebner/Chair of the SANDAG Board, and the Fairgrounds have exerted their influence with false information, and attacked Del Mar and trying to push the entire burden of destruction on Del Mar, is inconceivable.

Due to the Fairgrounds mis stating their full-time employee numbers, Del Mar has to produce Affordable Housing for this erroneous number. It is incredible the Fairgrounds is holding Del Mar hostage and pausing the Affordable Housing discussion until Del Mar caves to their demands to let Del Mar be destroyed by the SANDAG construction. Del Mar is reviewing once again putting the Affordable Housing up on the North Bluff to expand Del Mar’s options. These actions should be reviewed and perhaps Mayor Heebner and Jewel Edson should be recused from this project due to conflict of interest, lack of transparency, spreading miss representation of information and impropriety. If, they wish to insist on having Option A proposed by the Coalition for Safer Trains removed from the rail alternatives then, the thousands of residents represented in the Coalition for Safer Trains insist on having Options; Under Crest Canyon, Under Camino Del Mar, and Double Tracking the Bluffs all removed from consideration.

It should be noted: "No meaningful growth projected through 2040." SANDAG keeps stating that ridership is increasing and hence justifies this rail project. The most recent 2023 population projections from the State of California Department of Finance project that February 18, 2025 Item 02
the population of Southern California will remain essentially stable over the next several decades and will even be smaller in 2070 than today.
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/projections/ The 2007 Programmatic EIR/EIS for the SDLRR Project included a table projecting the population of Southern California (SD, OC, LA) at 19.3 million in 2020. This "projected increase in population" is also referenced in the SANDAG 2023 Alternatives Analysis Report. In contrast, the State of California Department of Finance projects that the population of Southern California will be 15.1 million 50 years later than this in 2070, a smaller population than today. This negates SANDAG's repeated assertions that a "suite of LOSSAN Rail Corridor infrastructure improvements between Los Angeles Union Station and San Diego" is needed to "address the expected growth in travel demand in the Southern California region resulting from a projected increase in population." SANDAG and other LOSSAN advocates make up justifications for the railway and stick with these justifications in the face of contrary facts and data.

Horse racing is dying out nationwide. There’s no reason to destroy the beautiful city of Del Mar for an underused and outdated train and an event centered-fairground for an Event Platform and bridge sitting in the floodplain, that only benefits them. The Fairgrounds operational revenues and expenses for 2024, including payroll, and before payment of the current year’s portion of principal on long-term debt obligations, District anticipates realizing a positive net impact of $2,849,276. After payment of the current year’s principal, a positive net impact of $7,400.

A Second fact - It’s become gospel that “The San Diego rail segment is San Diego's only rail connection to the United States.” Well, yes…But SANDAG has yet to show the true cost value analysis of this track with the true published population numbers. San Diego's case for rail is weak, in particular given the expense of maintaining the tracks and no meaningful growth projected through 2040. Why are we still arguing about options to relocate the train when its very existence now and for the foreseeable future has not been justified?
This SANDAG ‘value analysis’ simply assumes that the train is justified no matter what the cost. Where is the data that supports this fundamental assumption? And why are we not looking at the true costs and benefits in tandem as we would with even our personal household expenses? SANDAG’s financial analysis thus far don’t show the detailed cost benefit and value analysis, based on real published population reports and ridership numbers.

In summary, SANDAG, rail agencies and the SANDAG Board Members need to take into consideration how the rail and trains impact the communities in terms of the environment, the cost benefit, the value, climate change, economic impacts, true population numbers, destruction of a town, and livelihoods being destroyed by taking homes and small businesses by eminent domain.

It is crucial to understand how the increased infrastructure of the new Trestle Bridge will impact the lagoon, impact tidal flow and increase sand being trapped. You will remember during summer thousands of fish died in the lagoon due to lack of oxygen due to the increased tides bringing in higher levels of sand, impacting the tidal flow. Hence cities need to dredge the lagoons more frequently at a cost of $1m each time. This is not sustainable for the environment or the cities. These coastal cities used to dredge the lagoons once a year, now it is at least 3 to 4 times per year, and going up. Can your city afford to do this?
February 18, 2025 Item 02
The message is clear from tax paying citizens in Del Mar they will not accept eminent domain of any resident’s home, taking of small businesses, no tunnels under homes, no portals near homes, no freight or high-speed trains under homes.
• The members of the SANDAG Board, we ask you to look to your neighbor at the Board Table on February 28th, when you make this massive decision. Ask them in good faith are they ok with you destroying and demolishing a huge section of their city, taking resident’s homes and small businesses, and impact the city and residents economically, health wise and environmentally? It is a missed opportunity and quite disappointing given the work your team has put into this effort. We want to be clear, the only acceptable option, is an I-5 alignment, somewhere north of Del Mar’s residential neighborhoods.

Thank you for your consideration,
Angelina Neglia
Coalition for Safer Trains
cc. Department of Transportation
DOD
FRA
DOGE
Senator Blakespear
Congressman Levin
Todd Gloria
All City Councils in San Diego Area

February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Ruth Evans <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 7:34 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: train tunnel
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.

The best option is no tunnel and using the I-5 corridor. Thank you, Ruth Evans 2115 Balboa Ave, Del Mar, CA 92014, USA.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Ann Williamson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 2:13 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Agenda Item 2, City Council Meeting, February 18, 2025 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I strongly support moving the tracks to the I-5 from Oceanside to Sorrento Valley. There is no point in doing a tunnel under Del Mar if it cannot connect to tracks to the north.

Ann and Gill Williamson
Oribia Road
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 5:55 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: 'Michael Deftos'
Subject: Red Dot Letter - Del Mar City Council - 18 Feb 2025 - Agenda Item 2 - San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment
Attachments: Red Dot Letter 18 Feb 2025.docx; Red and yellow line routes - SANDAG draft.jpg; Michael Deftos route options.png
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. I plan to make oral comments at the City Council meeting on 2/18/25 and I’d like to have the image attached displayed while I’m speaking. It’s labeled: Red and yellow line routes – SANDAG draft I also plan to make oral comments for Michae Deftos (who will be out of town) and I’d like the 2nd image attached displayed at that time. It’s labeled: Michael Deftos route options Thank you,
Amy Cheshire
619-992-5293
February 18, 2025 Item 02
Red Dot Letter – Del Mar City Council – 18 Feb 2025
Agenda Item 2 - San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment
Mayor Gaasterland, Councilmembers Martinez, Quirk and Spelich and SANDAG representatives:

My name is Amy Cheshire. I’ve lived in coastal communities in San Diego County almost my entire life and I’ve lived on San Dieguito Drive in Del Mar for the last ten years. I have an engineering degree from UCSD. My father James T. Cheshire was the Chief of Environmental Planning for Cal Trans in San Diego for decades and I grew up discussing the ecology of our local coastal communities at our family dinner table. Recently, I’ve been collaborating with neighbors to find a realignment solution that protects people, their homes and the coastal environment. My goal is to help identify a route that meets the needs of Del Mar, Solana Beach and the Fairgrounds.

SANDAG staff recently released its recommended alignments. The “yellow line” route above ground in the fragile San Dieguito Lagoon and the “green line” route on the fragile Del Mar bluffs are clearly not viable routes. A reasonable person has to ask, “Why were these routes recommended?” I would like to know the answer to that question.

I’m going to focus my comments on the “yellow line” alignment that passes through the sensitive habitat of the San Dieguito Lagoon.

This new alignment was a shock. It was NOT one of the 16 alignments recommended in the Value Analysis (VA) but it’s being described as “similar to NOP Alternative A.” It’s not at all similar. This alignment concept was rejected after 2017 environmental studies revealed that this route would destroy Tier 1 protected habitat in the lagoon.
1 It would also destroy the planned Riverpath Del Mar
connection between the Coast to Crest trail and the Crest Canyon trail. One of the stated VA goals is to “Avoid and/or minimize negative effects …(on)… publicly owned parks, recreational trails, beaches, wetlands, ecological reserves, wildlife or waterfowl refuges….” The “yellow line” route fails to meet this goal.

Another VA goal is to “Minimize impacts in the surrounding communities to existing homes…” This route would have severe adverse impacts on 60 plus homes along San Dieguito Drive and Racetrack View Drive. The “yellow line” route fails to meet this goal.

However, SANDAG staff’s recommendation of a route with a sharp turn and an S-curve as it heads east to the I-5 does open the door for consideration and analysis of less expensive and less destructive routes. There is a route I’ll call the “red line” route which is shown in my sketch. It has many advantages that the “yellow line” route lacks. It also might cost a billion dollars less than the other recommended routes. It rises at a 2% grade from the south end of the Special Events Platform along the southern perimeter of the Fairgrounds to an overpass that crosses Jimmy Durante Blvd. It crosses state-owned vacant land above sea level (avoiding costly tunnels) until it aligns with the I-5 bridge over the San Dieguito River and then tunnels under the I-5 freeway. 1 https://www.sandag.org/-/media/SANDAG/Documents/PDF/projects-and-programs/featuredprojects/lossan-rail-improvements-del-mar-bluffs/del-mar-bluffs-stabilization/alignment-alternatives-andenvironmental-constraints-study-2017-appendices-2023-09-08.pdf February 18, 2025 Item 02
This proposed “red line” route:
1) Preserves the San Dieguito Lagoon and restores the Penasquitos Lagoon 2) Has no negative impact on the City of Solana Beach
3) Has no negative impact on ANY homes in Del Mar
4) Runs entirely over state-owned property so there is no need for eminent domain 5) Eliminates expensive tunnels under private property and below sea level 6) Allows the Fairgrounds to build their special events platform as planned 7) Leaves the existing trestle bridge in place until the new bridge next to the I-5 is completed 8) Frees up the railroad right-of-way south of the Fairgrounds to be used for trails, bike paths, beach access and possibly housing.
9) Allows Riverpath Del Mar to be completed as planned which will finally link the Coast to Crest Trail and the Crest Canyon trail with a serene and safe trail along the edge of the lagoon
February 18, 2025 Item 02
One of the stated benefits of the Fairgrounds Special Events Platform is the improvement of traffic and emissions.
2 Less traffic means fewer parking spaces will be needed in the Fairgrounds parking lot. This extra space can be used for the railroad.

My last question is this: what is more important – protecting people’s homes and the San Dieguito Lagoon or protecting a parking lot?
I hope that SANDAG will recommend this route for further study. My hope is that it is still possible to choose a route for the railroad that protects people and their homes and our unique and rare and beautiful coastal environment.

Respectfully,
Amy Cheshire
2 https://www.delmarfairgrounds.com/p/public-information1/strategic-planning/transportation-accessibility February 18, 2025 Item 02
February 18, 2025 Item 02
February 18, 2025 Item 02
RED DOT: Del Mar City Council Meeting on 02-18-2025
2-17-2025
The Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
Over the past few weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to read through the ongoing email exchanges about the relocation of the train tracks AKA LOSSAN Rail Realignment, and I’ve been encouraged by the positive energy from most members of our community. It’s clear that everyone is focused on protecting the best interests of Del Mar and I appreciate that very much. I’d like to express my gratitude to Laura DeMarco for providing valuable insight into Fairgrounds processes, to Angelina Neglia, Michael Deftos and Amy Cheshire for their efforts to identify options that should prevent SANDAG from using eminent domain while minimizing potential disruptions to our community. I also want to thank and commend Shirli Weiss and Laura Schaefer for their thoughtful emails emphasizing the importance of gathering more information and achieving greater clarity.

While I’ve appreciated these conversations, I’ve also noticed that one very important issue hasn’t been addressed: how our discussions with the Fairgrounds and SANDAG, especially what transpired at the last Fairgrounds board meeting, will impact the City of Del Mar’s compliance with the housing element we submitted to HCD. As I understand it, we are required to create a concrete plan to meet our housing goals, and this plan heavily depends on the cooperation of the Fairgrounds. While I am very supportive of finding an ideal solution for relocating the train tracks, I believe it is equally important that we focus on our housing obligations. These two issues are interconnected, and achieving success in one area should not come at the expense of the other. In fact, non-compliance with the housing element will lead to “by-right” development, which will have serious and immediate implications for our city, while the train track relocation may be several years away.

We are all aware that each of you, our four current City Council members, including Councilman Spelich, ran on a platform that prioritized housing and ensuring the character of Del Mar was maintained. In fact it was you Mayor Gaasterland that worked passionately with Karen Lare, Tracy Martinez and I on the City’s task force for Affordable Housing and also when the Housing Element was edited before submission to HCD. You all committed to fulfilling our obligations under state law to avoid "by-right" development, and you are joined by eight former council members who also recognized the importance of this issue. Please remember your pledge to the voters who elected you to meet our housing mandate. You know that to meet the mandate, we will February 18, 2025 Item 02
need the support of the Fairgrounds board and it’s CEO. If the Fairgrounds is unable to assist us in meeting our affordable housing goals, we are subject to “by-right” development, which will also undermine our Community Plan, greatly weaken our Design Review Ordinance, remove local control, and destroy the charm and character of our city. Moreover, the City of Del Mar relies on the Fairgrounds for about 25% of its operating budget. As we learned during the pandemic, if this revenue stream were to disappear or reduce greatly, the city would face difficult choices, including potentially reducing essential services and depleting resources we need to effectively tackle the train relocation. Clearly, the Fairgrounds is a critical partner for Del Mar’s success. Just as we are trying to protect our residents and businesses, we must ensure that the Fairgrounds does not lose revenues.

In my view, the most beneficial approach for Del Mar is to foster collaboration with all of our partners, including the Fairgrounds, Solano Beach, SANDAG, and other local jurisdictions. While there may be differing views, I believe it’s essential for us to work together in a spirit of partnership and cooperation. We should not be engaging in a call for arms as has been said. Given our city’s size and resources, we must avoid creating an impression of elitism or alienating potential allies. By building strong relationships and finding common ground which I believe is your responsibility as Council members representing the best interests of Del Mar, we can achieve both our housing goals and find a successful solution for relocating the train tracks so there is no adverse impact to our businesses and residents.

At this stage, it’s vital that we continue to explore all available options, gather more information, and seek clarity. I encourage the City Council to assign this task to our very capable City Manager, Ashley Jones, who can engage with her counterparts at the Fairgrounds, Solano Beach, SANDAG, and any other relevant stakeholders to ensure that we take a comprehensive and well-informed approach.

Thank you to our council members and to our community members for your continued dedication to the future of Del Mar.

Jas Grewal
Del Mar resident for 32 years.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Stephanie Tarkington <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 7:54 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot for council meeting, February 18, 2024; agenda item 2 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and Del Mar City Council members,
I would like to address the # 4: Del Mar Bluffs Double Track Reinforced item listed as one of 5 recommendations from SANDAG's study of rail realignments to remove the tracks from the very fragile bluffs through the Del Mar segment of the LOSSAN corridor.

My husband and I bought our first home in Del Mar in 1969 at 113 11th St. We bought, built and moved into our current home at 100 11th St in 1978. We enjoyed living next to the tracks, got to know many of the engineers by sight, especially in the age of the little red cabooses. Did a lot of waving! Over the past 40 plus years I have witnessed the owners of the tracks, Santa Fe and now NCTD (a public entity) attempt to keep the tracks on the bluffs by many means. Public records will show that the tracks from about the curve at 14th St south to about 12th St. have already been moved easterly from the bluff edge by about 10 feet to avoid a collapse. Probably about 25 years ago. Further, soldier piles and cribbing on the bluff directly in front of my home have already been placed prior to the current attempt to shore up the bluffs to keep the passenger and freight trains safe. It is safe to say that many millions of dollars have already been spent to try keeping the train on these sandstone bluffs.

Adding double tracks along our eroding bluffs simply delays the inevitable need to move the tracks to a safer location at a much higher cost for future taxpayers.

I urge SANDAG to eliminate #4 as a possible solution to this very grave problem of realigning the tracks away from the bluffs. The other options are sensitive and not perfect choices as the portals and years of construction equipment and actual construction are going to be a major disruption for many many people.

Choose wisely, being sure that cost is not the primary concern, but rather the future ramifications to the taxpayers funding this project and to the short term ramifications of a long term building project in the lives of our local citizens of Del Mar and Solana Beach.

Thank you for your time,
Stephanie Tarkington
100 11th St.

Del Mar, Ca, 92014
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Public Comment: Item 2: LOSSAN UPDATES, February 18, 2025 Del Mar City Council Meeting
Honorable Mayor Gaasterland and Distinguished Members of the Del Mar City Council and visiting SANDAG representatives:

I am a long-time resident of Del Mar. I am an attorney with over 40 years-experience practicing law in California’s state and federal courts. I was a partner at the world’s largest global law firm and served on its Executive Committee during the financial crisis. I along with my colleague Laura Schaefer, successfully submitted a proposed amendment to California SB 1098 asking for the Coastal Commission to be added to the working group called upon to weigh in at the drafting stage on any new proposed construction on the coast. I have closely followed the developments of the Rail Realignment project. Here are some of my thoughts on the Value Analysis (“VA”):

1. Still Not There: the Value Analysis and Routes it Recommends for Study in the EIR Need More Time, Work and Consensus Building
I will begin by saying that I appreciate the amount of hard work that went into the Value Analysis (“VA”).

But, big picture: the VA is the outcrop of, and suffers from, the same fatal flaw in approach that permeates SANDAG’s 2017 and 2023 studies and that is this: it pays overwhelming deference to rail stakeholder interests (speed and transit time) and is cavalier and thoughtless about community interests. It pretends that a couple of minutes of time is important to passengers, when in fact the driving force is the desire to speed an everincreasing number of freight trains through a small neighborhood. The VA is not an objective analysis, it is an advocacy piece for the railroads, tone-deaf to adverse community impacts on the most destructive routes. It elevates freight carriers’ objectives of speed under Del Mar’s cherished family neighborhoods, downplays or entirely disregards the human cost and neighborhood destruction with the stock phrase “ The portals could [ SW: meaning would] extend into commercial and residential properties” .

Serving solely the Rail interests, the VA recommends that Routes 15 and 16 and 12 proceed to EIR study. These routes are the most devastating in terms of impacts to the Del Mar community. Route 14, a route that would circumvent the City, is dropped from recommendation to proceed, just as SANDAG’s Vice-Chair, now Chair, demanded of SANDAG’s project team when it appeared as Option A in the NOP. A new “yellow” route is added to the recommendation-to-proceed list, undeveloped, with little information.

The VA states the Project Goal as follows:

February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 “To maintain and enhance passenger and freight service along the San Diego segment of the LOSSAN rail corridor.”
Respectfully, that is half a goal, and with the wrong emphasis. The appropriate goal, given the fact that the realignment will travel through densely populated areas, must be:

To maintain the integrity of the cities and neighborhoods that are compelled to host rail service, while ensuring continued passenger and freight service along San Diego segment of the LOSSAN corridor.

The VA and the project team’s recommendations are not ready for a SANDAG Board vote on February 28, especially since the process has been tampered with by SANDAG’s Chair. The vote should be postponed to allow for analysis of the late stage addition of the “yellow route” which holds some promise, and consensus building under the leadership of SANDAG CEO Mario Orso or even a retired judge-professional mediator.

In the 2017 and 2023 SANDAG reports, high train speed through the tiny town of Del Mar was the holy grail and given single-minded top priority in realignment analysis. Community interests were all but ignored. The Crest Canyon route, the most destructive to Del Mar, was even proudly called the “higher speed” route by the SANDAG project team. The June 2024 NOP (of the EIR) followed in the footsteps of those studies, prioritizing two routes, Routes B and C, which show up as routes 15 and 16 in the VA. These routes, if implemented, would have a devastating impact on Del Mar while maximizing dangerous speed, all to shave a couple of minutes off transit time in a 351- mile corridor. A third route that circumvented Del Mar, Route A, was added at the last minute to the NOP in response to citizen outrage, but was engineered to only 1%, leading to bashing by Solana Beach and the Fairgrounds on the grounds that it was underdeveloped and might interfere with their business during construction (ignoring that they would already suffer disturbance from the rebuilding of the trestle bridge which they support). In the VA, Route 14 is similar to Route A and did not make it to the short list of routes recommended for further study.

The VA has had the effect of even further galvanizing the Del Mar Community against eminent domain and the hijacking of its downtown, and spurred more creative thinking by the community on the newly added yellow route concept, and people are working hard to come up with a route that focuses on the yellow route concept that would be acceptable to all the residential and business communities, if given more time.

That said, if the project team is going to recommend that SANDAG proceed on February 28, 2025, (which is too soon for most to digest the VA report and its implications) with a vote on the routes to be studied, recommending, in the amended NOP, the study of the most destructive routes, (routes 15 and 16 and 12) , then it should:

February 18, 2025 Item 02
3 • Also recommend for study: VA route 14
• Recommend for study the “yellow route” (or some variation thereof) which first surfaced on February 7 and is not in the VA.

Modifications to each could yield an acceptable consensus route, given more time. • Route 10 should also be studied for long-term relocation of segments of the Corridor from the coast to the I-5 freeway, which, because of cost, cannot be implemented all at once and therefore must remain a long-term goal.

Ultimately, the project team must abandon its reckless emphasis on high speed that has driven the analysis and led it to consider destructive routes 15 and 16. If all attempts at reason fail and SANDAG recommends a high-speed train under Del Mar that would surely destroy the city and its neighborhoods, its folly will only lead to another high-speed train project investigation by the current administration, instead of funding. Time and money on studies will be utterly wasted.

2. The concern that SANDAG will lose funding if it does not proceed immediately with the San Dieguito Lagoon Bridge and Events Platform is not supported.

As a rationale for proceeding with the reconstruction of the San Dieguito River Bridge and new construction of the events platform, before the EIR analysis of the candidate Realignment routes, the VA, Solana Beach and the Fairgrounds have all used the scare tactic that SANDAG will lose $347M in funding if they don’t build the precise project they applied for almost 10 years ago. No support is offered for this counter-intuitive proposition.

First, the fact is that if the Bridge and Platform lose funding, it will lose it in 2025 before construction is commenced and it will lose it because of the current federal administration’s aversion to high-speed train related rail projects which it regards as wasteful. But if that event does not happen, there is no reason to think SANDAG would lose the funds if it simply asks for a modification in the scope of work or for an extension of time needed to comport the project with the larger Realignment project.

The fact is that much of the allotted money would still be spent on the same tasks that formed the basis of the funding application and would be used for those purposes regardless of the realignment route chosen. These include:
• Funds for dredging and the dismantling and destruction of the current bridge, • Funds for the completion of design and implementation of an events platform, and • Funds for the double-tracking from Dahlia Dr. in Solana Beach, going south.

SANDAG would simply ask for an extension to comport the rest of the project (the bridge or alternative routing of the bridge/tunnel in the lagoon) with the best realignment route. The February 18, 2025 Item 02
4 State (working through the California Transportation Commission (CTC) has granted both time extensions and amendments to the scope of work on other projects. So have federal funding agencies. There is no reason to think they would not do so here rather than yank back the money. SANDAG’s high level management should ask, not assume it would fail. Instead, the fear of losing funding has been used as a scare tactic in the VA to argue against a realignment route that would circumvent the city, further impairing the objectivity of the VA.

3. A Route that builds a tunnel where hazardous materials will be sped under homes and businesses would be reckless.

My final note on this communication is to say that VA Routes 15 and 16 that envision high speed transport of freight, including hazardous materials, are reckless. We must realize that Rail freight in this country is run by a powerful oligarchy of four companies with a wellfunded lobby and ubiquitous PR machine. But practically no week goes by without one or more train derailment somewhere in the U.S ( there were 742 in 2023). The devastation in East Palestine, Ohio will haunt that town forever and it is hardly a singular event. Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad, the freight carrier through Del Mar, is known for cutting engineers on trains even in high profit years and has had a disturbing record of whistleblower lawsuits (where plaintiffs have won), where plaintiffs have shown they were retaliated against for giving voice to safety violations. We cannot afford to take the serious risk of freight carriage under homes or businesses in Del Mar, and if SANDAG and NCTD permit the reckless tunnelling proposed in the VA as possible routes, and there follows a derailment under homes, they will bear the consequences both morally and financially, while BNSF will treat it as a cost of doing business .

Thank you.

Shirli Weiss
551 Stratford Court
Del Mar, CA. 92014
858.449.4850
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Laura <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 9:10 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot February 18 SANDAG presentation
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 Members:

I am writing with respect to SANDAG’s most recent proposed routes for the LOSSAN realignment and most particularly with respect to the double tracking of the bluff and routes that require eminent domain.

First, as to the new “double track on the bluff” iteration: SANDAG and NCTD agreed, as a condition to obtaining the Consistency Certification for Bluff Project 5, to the enhancement of the trail system on the bluff top. This was mitigation for the damage to the beach caused by the erection of sea walls and other improvements. The consistency certification requires that those sea walls be removed once the track is removed, not to remain in perpetuity (and certainly not to erect more sea walls- as I understand is required by this new double track iteration.)
NCTD’s settlement of the STB action with Coastal Commission also acknowledges and reaffirms this obligation.

One simply cannot fathom how SANDAG could reasonably expect to obtain an authorization from the Coastal Commission for double tracking on the bluff given this history. Frankly, it is a waste of public funds to conduct an EIR of double tracking on the bluff when the Coastal Commission, the agency charged with enforcing the state’s environmental laws, has determined that keeping the tracks on the bluffs is an environmental catastrophe. I do understand that the “do nothing” option is required for the NOP, but resurrecting any new plan that keeps the tracks on the bluffs in perpetuity is the same irrational thinking SANDAG has employed since the train careened off the collapsing bluff a century ago.

As well, the Legislature authorized public expenditure of 300 million to analyze proposed routes to move the tracks off the coastal bluff, not reinforce the bluff with more concrete and steel and erect more sea walls, so expenditure of public funds to engineer a double track on the bluff is in violation of the legislative authorization, or at very least its intent.

As to the routes requiring eminent domain, SANDAG has not provided any indication as to the number of homes that will be subject to eminent domain with any of these alternatives, nor is it clear that they have factored in the price of eminent domain and easements into the cost estimates (not just the value of homes, but the litigation costs February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 such ventures entail). Including a monetary value without figuring in this cost is, frankly, quite deceptive.

Since minimizing eminent domain and easements is now one of SANDAG’s top three priorities, it would seem that this is something that must be provided in the "value analysis” in order to obtain meaningful public analysis and input.

Given these concerns, one cannot help but feel that SANDAG has not been completely transparent in this process, likely because it would lay bare the true cost- both emotional and monetary- of eminent domain of family homes. The emotional toll of eminent domain on families would be significant, leading to displacement, disruption of lives and feelings of helplessness. Many homes in Del Mar have been in families for generations. Forcing people to leave their homes, which may have housed families for generations, is cruel and cannot truly be compensated with a monetary payment.

As a practical matter, there aren’t that many replacement homes in Del Mar that may be affordable to those displaced families, since this is one of the smallest cities in the county, with much of the land at or near the coast. Some families may be forced to leave Del Mar forever.

I hope you will urge SANDAG to reconsider, and adopt routes that will not personally devastate families, the bluff and Del Mar beaches.

Laura Schaefer
6th Street
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Susan Miller <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 9:12 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: AGENDA ITEM #2, LOSSAN RAIL ALIGNMENT, 02/18/25 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.

SANDAG’s Value Analysis of the rail location is just another box checked to support SANDAG’s ultimate decision without regard to the horrific impact to the residents of Del Mar.

Double tracking the bluff ignores the decision supported by the Coastal Commission and others to move the tracks off the bluff.

With double-tracking, a significant segment of the upper bluff will be removed. The coast path will be gone. The drainage ditch will be gone. The plants and trees and wildlife will be gone. The sound of the ocean will be drowned out by the noise from two trains running constantly directly below us as we sit on our decks. Property Values will plummet. There will probably be a fence that will block our ocean view. With 30 feet of bluff top removed in front of us, the continuing erosion from wind and rain will soon undermine our homes unless SAMDAG construction has already doomed our homes on our fragile bluff.

We respectfully request that the city council stop this SANDAG insanity and demand an option that is off the bluff and spares all Del Mar residents’ homes.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Susan Miller & Mike Maier, Residents of Del Mar Bluff for 40 years.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Michael Deftos <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 6:58 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot #2, Item #2, City Council Meeting 2/18/25 Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Honorable Mayor and Del Mar City Council,
Regarding the LOSSAN SDLRR Project:

Following up on my prior “red dot,” I had the pleasure of walking along the San Dieguito Lagoon and River from Racetrack View Drive to the trestle bridge and talking to other concerned residents about the sketched “yellow line” alignment. We discussed our thoughts about potential modifications to this alignment to solve the problem and benefit all interested parties. My hope is that SANDAG will consider these ideas and others put forward by the public. I hope the engineers will approach the design of this alignment as if they were trying to figure out the best solution to solve a problem in their own backyard. The best solution might not be the cheapest. It should be the best. This is a legacy project and the final alignment decision will be scrutinized for at least 100 years.

I believe there is a way to get the “yellow line” from an Events Platform at the Fairgrounds to under the I-5, going either under the San Dieguito Lagoon or skirting it. I believe this can be done in a way that minimizes impacts to the community of Del Mar, the Fairgrounds, and the San Dieguito Lagoon and would not impact Solana Beach at all. It would not require eminent domain of people’s homes or tunnels carrying hazardous freight under their homes. I believe you have talented and dedicated engineers who can figure this out given the direction to do so.

The San Dieguito Double Track and Special Events Platform Project can proceed, with initial work started in the Solana Beach Trench. While this is ongoing, reconsider the exact configuration of the Special Events Platform and the replacement San Dieguito River Bridge to maximize the ability of the “yellow line” to curve to the east, following the general course of the San Dieguito River. Ideally, the San Dieguito Double Track and Special Events Platform Project would have been considered as part of the LOSSAN SDLRR Project instead of being segmented into a separate project. But there is still time to redesign the new San Dieguito Bridge and Special Events Platform in the context of consideration of the “yellow line” alignment.

For example, consider lowering the Special Events Platform a few feet (but still above the 100-yearfloodplain plus anticipated sea level rise) and having the bridge descend as it curves to the east. I measured the distance from the south end of the currently designed Special Events Platform to the Jimmy Durante Bridge. It’s about 1,700 ft. A 2% descent over this distance is a 34 ft descent. With the south end of the currently designed Special Events Platform at about 25 ft, the “yellow line” would be -10 ft (negative 10 ft) at the Jimmy Durante Bridge. If the south end of it was a little lower (17 ft?) and slanted 2%, the track could be even lower at the Jimmy Durante Bridge. If that’s not enough, raise and move the Jimmy Durante Bridge a little to the east. Raising it might help protect it from flooding and sea level rise. Perhaps this could provide some land to the Fairgrounds for an affordable housing site or to “replace” other land used for affordable housing. I’m February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 trying to figure out how this project could be used to add value to the Fairgrounds and the immediate area in general.

Another idea. Consider shifting the Special Events Platform a little farther north. Or starting the curve to the east a little farther north. I noticed that if I made a “yellow line” following SANDAG’s 2017 I-5 East route and shifted it north, the “yellow line” curves around the southwest edge of the Fairgrounds property and stays north of the river without any curve tightening.

Perhaps the “yellow line” route could traverse the river on a curve and go along the south bank of the river, even through the Del Mar public works property. Maybe Del Mar would “trade” you that property for the railroad wye property. All possible routes need to be seriously considered. There needs to be some give and take.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
3 Another idea, which I previously suggested. If the “yellow line” can descend adjacent to the river to below the Jimmy Durante Bridge, perhaps the floodwall needed to protect it could also be designed to help protect either the Fairgrounds (on the north bank) or North Commercial District (on the south bank) from flooding and sea level rise.

If it's impossible to get the “yellow line” below grade and under the Jimmy Durante Bridge, an above grade route could be considered. But get it over to the I-5 in a way that minimizes impacts to the communities of Del Mar and Solana Beach, the Fairgrounds, and the San Dieguito Lagoon. From a legacy perspective, one could think of this as the first step to moving the alignment to the I-5 corridor. If the old trestle bridge or a new smaller one were converted or constructed to serve as a biking and walking path between the Fairgrounds and Del Mar, this would benefit both the Fairgrounds and Del Mar and could be considered as a step towards a rails-to-trail conversion.

I previously mentioned the idea of a year round station instead of a special events station adjacent to the Fairgrounds.

In conclusion, the full potential of the “yellow line” alignment must be considered in depth before any decision is made. Input from the affected communities should be harnessed to help find the best solution that minimizes negative impacts and maximizes lasting benefits to all stakeholders.

Thanks for your consideration,
Michael Deftos
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: suren dutia <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 7:55 AM
To: Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; John Spelich; Dan Quirk Cc: Ashley Jones; Sarah Krietor; City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: RED DOT: PRESENTATIONS: Item #2 City Council Meeting of February 18, 2025 Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
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.

Mayor Gaasterland, Council Members Martinez and Spelich, and fellow Del Martians, By now, many of you have probably received Councilmember Quirk’s e-blast from yesterday, where he accused SANDAG of committing “fraud” in the Train and Del Mar Rail Tunnel Project and advocating that DOT and DOGE launch an investigation. Unless Mr. Quirk’s main objective was to entertain us (and let’s be real, he’s pretty skilled at spinning factually questionable and highly implausible ideas), I couldn't help but chuckle at the sheer stretch of his imagination. But since he's thinking "outside the box" and wants us to believe it’s all in the name of public good, might I suggest he take things up a notch? Perhaps some even more thrilling “conspiracy” theories? And, if he needs some help, he might want to reach out to Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert—both are seasoned experts at fabricating wild conspiracies.

It seems Mr. Quirk has crowned Elon Musk, the unelected Trumpian mogul, his new hero in this anti-SANDAG crusade. Clever, right? But I do wonder if Mr. Quirk knows that Musk owns The Boring Company, a business that specializes in drilling tunnels. The Boring Company is always on the lookout for new opportunities, and Mr. Quirk might be unknowingly showing Musk how to expand his empire—thanks to his little DOGE adventure. Just picture this: DOGE investigating SANDAG. Musk would be salivating! Can you imagine him lobbying DOT and Trump, suggesting that all of SANDAG’s staff should be canned, while The Boring Company swoops in to take over and drill through Del Mar? And of course, he’d promise to get the job done faster and cheaper, right? I mean, with all those multiple jurisdictions involved, I’m sure Musk and DOGE wouldn’t hesitate to use eminent domain— no matter how many homes they’d have to bulldoze.

But wait—there’s a fringe benefit for Mr. Quirk too. As a Republican, he could start rubbing elbows with some new Republican power players. Who knows, this might open up new career doors and even upward mobility for him. Assuming Mr. Quirk has some ambition and a view beyond little ol’ Del Mar, what about an equity stake or partnership February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 in The Boring Company? Kudos to him—he’s no dummy. There may be a method to his madness after all.

Suren G. Dutia
P-858/792-9439
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Isla Cordelae <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 10:01 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot for council meeting, February 18,2024: agenda item 2 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.

Isla Cordelae < [email protected]>
To : [email protected]
Dear Mayor and City Council members,
With regard to #4 Del Mar Double Track Reinforced item as one of the 5 choices from the SANDAG railroad track study, please eliminate this choice.

I have lived in Del Mar since 1967 along 4th, 7th, 8th, Sherry Lane and now on 11th Street, witnessing the rapid and sometimes very dramatic erosion of the bluff. One morning at the end of Sherrie Lane, I saw a 15' wide by 25' long section of the cliff slump with a resounding sound that I will never forget. These cliffs are porous sandstone on top of a clay base. Drilling, removing sand, adding back heavy rods and cement reinforcements provides channels for water seepage and additional weight to accelerate the sliding of the sandstone over the slippery clay base. The apparent accelerated rate of erosion in front of the pilings and cement walls that is occurring speaks to this process as a very expensive and short-term 'solution'.

As former director of the University of San Deigo Environmental Studies Lab along with Dr. Richard Phillips (geologist) and Dr. John Bradshaw, (former resident of Del Mar), we performed some of the baseline studies of the North County Lagoons and near shore environments for the U.S. Army Corp and California Fish and Wildlife. Many of the geological findings of the instability of the North County cliffs have been ignored over the years, such as the nature of the Solana Beach 'unconsolidated sandstone' that predicted the potential danger associated with the overdevelopment of that area. Realignment of the tracks away from the cliffs has over fifty years of solid support in both predictions of what these areas can support and the potential dangers of ignoring the failure of previously tried expensive and very short term 'solutions'.

Thank you for your careful consideration,
Isla Cordelae
106 11th St.

Del Mar, CA 92014
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: FW: Agenda Item: presentation 2: Lossan Rail Presentation From: Beth <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 10:46 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item: presentation 2: Lossan Rail Presentation CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I am asking that the yellow line option as presented be rejected immediately.

In 2017, Sandag studied this option and due to many reasons including environmental concerns, this alignment was rejected.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Photo 1 and 2: Environmental concerns: On Racetrack View near the entrance to Crest Canyon the sign states: WildlifeRefuge. This rare and sensitive ecosystem is among the remaining 5% of California’s coastal wetlands, dune and intertidal zones.

According to the CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS FOR

DOUBLE TRACK ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES BETWEEN DEL MAR FAIRGROUNDS AND SORRENTO VALLEY dated December 2017:

This section of the San Dieguito River supports intertidal and salt marsh habitat. The alignment also would traverse a relatively isolated “triangle” of salt marsh and salt pan/mudflats. Salt marsh and salt pan/mudflats are considered sensitive habitats due to the relatively small amount of these habitats that remain and because geographic constraints and development patterns limit opportunities for the enhancement of existing, or creation of new, salt marsh and salt pan/mudflats habitat.

This portion of the San Dieguito Lagoon is also known to support light-footed clapper rail, Belding’s savannah sparrow, and California least tern. Federally endangered Del mar manzanita, and city protected Torrey Pine trees. In addition to ornamental and developed habitat, this section of the alignment would traverse Diegan sage scrub and southern maritime chaparral vegetation communities. Sensitive species recorded in or near this section of Crest Canyon include coastal California gnatcatcher and Pacific pocket mouse and Del Mar manzanita.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
3 Photo 3: The Interstate 5 Alignment would affect more habitat along Crest Canyon and have a greater potential for indirect effects (e.g., noise) on wildlife within the San Dieguito Lagoon. As a reflection of southern maritime chaparral’s high biological resource value, the City of San Diego designates it as Tier 1 habitat—the most sensitive of the four tiers established by the City.

The yellow line looks like the 2017 Interstate 5 East alignment (CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING

AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS FOR DOUBLE TRACK ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES BETWEEN DEL MAR FAIRGROUNDS AND SORRENTO VALLEY dated December 2017) This is the option that was studied. You can see that the alignment cutsthrough Crest Canyon and several properties along San Dieguito Drive as the train approaches a height to crossover Jimmy Durante.

San Dieguito River Bridge to Just East of Jimmy Durante Boulevard. This section of the alignment extends through Watermark on the west side of Jimmy Durante Boulevard and several single-family residences on the east side of Jimmy Durante Boulevard.

East of Jimmy Durante Boulevard Southeast to Crest Canyon. This segment of the Interstate 5 Alignment extends through/under several single-family residences.

Roughly Paralleling San Dieguito Drive through Crest Canyon. Where the alignment exits the southeastern portal of the cut-and-cover tunnel, it traverses through a large residential February 18, 2025 Item 02
4 property adjacent to San Dieguito Drive and then across undeveloped land before entering the northern portal of the main tunnel. The northern portal of the main tunnel segment (i.e., on the eastern edge of Crest Canyon) would be within City of San Diego designated Openspace.

Photo 4: Riverpath Del mar Phase III Expansion Project: As the gateway to the San Dieguito River Valley, the San Dieguito Lagoon provides habitat for sensitive wildlife and is an important stop for migrating birds. For people, Riverpath Del Mar is a popular destination for walking, jogging, birdwatching, and photography.

In partnership with the San Dieguito River Valley Conservancy, the City has opened existing trail segments between the railroad tracks and Grand Avenue Overlook. For this project, the February 18, 2025 Item 02
5 Conservancy has offered funding and a location to complete required environmental mitigation.

How will this project be impacted by the current yellow line alignment? Photo 5: Current view from within Crest Canyon looking towards the San Dieguito Lagoon February 18, 2025 Item 02
6 Photo 6: View from Racetrack View looking west. (This is for scale.) Existing streetlight is 20 feet tall. I am 6 feet tall. The train tracks will be 14 feet high, plus the 2 feet of the rail platform, plus the train height of 15 feet. This totals over 30 feet high when a train is passing over the tracks.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
7 Photo 7: View from Crest Canyon looking towards the San Dieguito Lagoon with the train bridge and portal roughly drawn.

For these reasons and other reasons, the yellow line alignment which is like the previously studied and rejected Interstate 5 Alignment should also be rejected.

Please design a route that preserves the Lagoon and people’s property.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Payson Stevens <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:27 AM
To: Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; John Spelich; Ashley Jones; City Clerk Mail Box Subject: RED DOT TO Del Mar City Council Feb. 18, 2025
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.
18 February 2025
Del Mar City Council
City Hall, 1050 Camino Del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
Subject: Opposition to Bluff Double Tracking and Request for Fair Consideration of Route A and the Yellow Line
Honorable Del Mar City Council Members,
Like so many Del Mar residents, my wife and I are deeply concerned about the recent shortlist of five alternatives for relocating the railroad off the crumbling Del Mar bluff and the potential negative impact on our community. These decisions seem to deviate from the intended purpose of the $300 million state-funded grant and could significantly affect the quality of life, safety, and property rights of Del Mar residents.

Key Concerns & Community Priorities
 Reject Double Tracking on the Bluff: We all know that this option is unsafe, unfeasible, and contradicts the grant’s purpose. The bluff is unstable and cannot support additional construction or weight. Further, this plan would require demolishing homes via eminent domain—an unacceptable and unnecessary action.
 Reinstate Route A (Option 15): The only option that avoided eminent domain was removed without explanation. Its removal coincides with Lesa Heebner’s appointment as SANDAG Chair, raising concerns of bias. If Route A is not reinstated, then all routes requiring eminent domain must also be eliminated.
 Modify the Yellow Line: This alternative avoids eminent domain but needs adjustments to prevent encroachment on homes and sensitive lagoon areas. Move it further north over the empty lot or tunnel beneath the lagoon to minimize impact.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Conclusion: Fair Treatment and Responsible Use of Funds The current shortlist is flawed and unacceptable. I urge the City Council to do their best to engage with SANDAG, Del Mar Fairgrounds, other North County representatives, and the Coastal Commission, to:
 Eliminate the double-tracking-on-the-bluff option immediately.  Reinstate Route A as a viable alternative.
 Modify the Yellow Line’s alignment to avoid residential and environmental impacts.

If Route A is not reinstated, all routes requiring eminent domain must be eliminated. As a deeply invested member of this community, I urge the City Council to advocate for solutions that prioritize safety, environmental sustainability, and the rights of Del Mar residents while ensuring that public funds are used effectively for long-term resilience.

I've seen (and opposed/fought) many serious issues threatening Del Mar's environmental and community quality in 52 years of residency. What is now being considered may be the most existential threat to the future of our community and its well-being.

Please employ all the tools in your/our bag to effectively stop this destruction.

Thank you,
Payson R. Stevens
Kamla K. Kapur
Del Mar, CA 92014
--
Payson R. Stevens
Science Communications
Artwork & Paintings
Indian National Park/Friends of GHNP
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Jennifer Anderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 1:12 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Re: Red Dot Re: Feb 18th Agenda Item #2: Presentation Regarding San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment Value Analysis Process
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:

If possible, please use this version of my red dot instead of the one sent earlier. I made a small tweak to comment

2. Thank you.

Honorable Mayor Gaasterland and Distinguished Members of the Del Mar City Council and Distinguished visiting SANDAG Representatives:

I am a Del Mar resident and have been following the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project for more than a year now.

Thank you to the SANDAG engineers and team, to the Del Mar City Staff and City Council and to the engaged citizens of Del Mar for your hard work and the countless hours you have put into identifying, not just roadblocks or problems, but potential solutions that could work for our region to achieve the goals of this project and minimize impacts to our communities. Here are my comments on the Value Analysis (“VA”):

Comment 1: Advance new “yellow” route (and variations of it as outlined in Red Dots) for further study I am encouraged by the proposed new “yellow” route and the variations of it suggested in Red Dot comments for this meeting. I would like to see this route and its variations advanced to the next phase of the project for further analysis and serious consideration. This is a potential route that all stakeholders should be able to rally around.

Comment 2: Quantify and confirm the scope of impact to communities with each route (Yellow Route and VA Routes 14, 15 and 16)
There is a lot of ambiguity around how our homes, businesses and towns will be impacted with this project and each of the prospective routes. Currently, there hasn’t been communicated or published in any public documents a quantification of these anticipated impacts with respect to each route. Yet it appears that one of the routes, NOP Route A (similar to route 14 in the VA), is being eliminated as a result of this Value Analysis because of concerns that the process of constructing Route A would “make a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years.”
This is not a statement or finding we have seen confirmed by SANDAG or identified in any of the public information provided as a result of SANDAG’s studies, so we all could use some clarification on this matter.

The questions I have for SANDAG are:
1) Please weigh in on your position on this. Is it the conclusion of SANDAG and your engineers that you have not been able to determine (and do not expect to be able to determine) ANY way of constructing NOP Route A/VA February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Route 14 (or a version of) without requiring making a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years? Is there no way to minimize these impacts to the Fairgrounds during the construction process? 2) You have a capable engineering team. Have they been challenged with this question – how can we implement NOP Route A/VA Route 14 without requiring the significant closure of the fairgrounds and disruption of business? If so, what is their conclusion or potential solutions?
We all are in agreement that the Fairgrounds is an important economic and cultural engine for our region and we most definitely want it to be successful now and far into the future. 3) Alignment A in the NOP is a modified version of the Alignment A solution initially proposed by the Del Mar citizens. Please address why the original Alignment A, as proposed by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition, was dismissed.

Comment 3: Advance VA Route 14 (and variations of it) for future study and serious consideration In reading through the stakeholder interview comments in the Value Analysis on pages 125-131, I was very surprised to see that there was no mention at all of the concerns for Imminent Domain or Trains Running Under Homes with regards to the original Crest Canyon NOP Route B (VA Route 15 and the route going under the neighborhoods of Del Mar). These are concerns our community has been expressing regarding Route B for quite some time. In addition, many of the stakeholder concerns called out in the Value Analysis as being unique to NOP Route A (VA Route 14 and the route Mayor Hebner has been advocating against) eg. “exhaust and emissions venting out of portals”, “noise and pollution with tunnel”, “construction fatigue for residents”, “community buy-in for route seems challenging”, “would affect many sources of the City’s tax revenue”, “would have to go under some residential houses”, in fact apply to all three NOP Routes but for whatever reason only show up in the stakeholder comments as being concerns relevant for Route A.

These stakeholder interview comments are clearly comments and not facts or insights based on study or research as of yet. The comments aren’t weighed with regards to the scope of their impact or organized in a manner that aligns with the project objectives. We see a comprehensive laundry list of comments regarding the concerns with Route A, and a much less comprehensive list regarding the concerns with Route B (or even C). Why were so many of our key concerns regarding Route B omitted? It’s a huge miss. And, clearly the number of comments does not equal value.

There were also several comments about concerns regarding the Fairgrounds verbalized in different ways. Again, these are comments not facts or insights identified as a result of studies. To dismiss a route based on comments vs. facts and insights gained as a result of an actual study is cause for concern. How thorough was this VA process and how much should these not-so-comprehensive stakeholder comments weigh in the decision to eliminate route A before any studies or analysis can be done?
In conclusion, please:
1) Advance the proposed “yellow” route and variations of it for future study and serious consideration 2) Study, confirm and quantify the scope of impact to communities that would result from each of the 4 proposed routes (Yellow Route and VA Routes 14, 15 and 16) 3) Advance VA Route 14 for future study and serious consideration (including the version of route A identified by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition (which is different than route A from that showed up in the NOP)
At the end of the day, we all want a solution that would minimize impacts to all communities.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully Submitted,
Jennifer Anderson
Del Mar Resident
February 18, 2025 Item 02
3 On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 11:53 AM Jennifer Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear City Clerk:

Kindly submit the following red-dot email to the City Council for the 02/18/25 meeting. Thank you.

Honorable Mayor Gaasterland and Distinguished Members of the Del Mar City Council and Distinguished visiting SANDAG Representatives:

I am a Del Mar resident and have been following the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project for more than a year now.

Thank you to the SANDAG engineers and team, to the Del Mar City Staff and City Council and to the engaged citizens of Del Mar for your hard work and the countless hours you have put into identifying, not just roadblocks or problems, but potential solutions that could work for our region to achieve the goals of this project and minimize impacts to our communities. Here are my comments on the Value Analysis (“VA”):

Comment 1: Advance new “yellow” route (and variations of it as outlined in Red Dots) for further study I am encouraged by the proposed new “yellow” route and the variations of it suggested in Red Dot comments for this meeting. I would like to see this route and its variations advanced to the next phase of the project for further analysis and serious consideration. This is a potential route that all stakeholders should be able to rally around.

Comment 2: Quantify and confirm the scope of impact to communities with each route (Yellow Route and VA Routes 12, 14, 15 and 16)
There is a lot of ambiguity around how our homes, businesses and towns will be impacted with this project and each of the prospective routes. Currently, there hasn’t been communicated or published in any public documents a quantification of these anticipated impacts with respect to each route. Yet it appears that one of the routes, NOP Route A (similar to route 14 in the VA), is being eliminated as a result of this Value Analysis because of concerns that the process of constructing Route A would “make a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years.”
This is not a statement or finding we have seen confirmed by SANDAG or identified in any of the public information provided as a result of SANDAG’s studies, so we all could use some clarification on this matter.

The questions I have for SANDAG are:
1) Please weigh in on your position on this. Is it the conclusion of SANDAG and your engineers that you have not been able to determine (and do not expect to be able to determine) ANY way of constructing NOP Route A/VA Route 14 (or a version of) without requiring making a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years? Is there no way to minimize these impacts to the Fairgrounds during the construction process? 2) You have a capable engineering team. Have they been challenged with this question – how can we implement NOP Route A/VA Route 14 without requiring the significant closure of the fairgrounds and disruption of business? If so, what is their conclusion or potential solutions? We all are in agreement that the Fairgrounds is an important economic and cultural engine for our region and we most definitely want it to be successful now and far into the future. 3) Alignment A in the NOP is a modified version of the Alignment A solution initially proposed by the Del Mar citizens. Please address why the original Alignment A, as proposed by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition, was dismissed.

Comment 3: Advance VA Route 14 (and variations of it) for future study and serious consideration February 18, 2025 Item 02
4 In reading through the stakeholder interview comments in the Value Analysis on pages 125-131, I was very surprised to see that there was no mention at all of the concerns for Imminent Domain or Trains Running Under Homes with regards to the original Crest Canyon NOP Route B (VA Route 15 and the route going under the neighborhoods of Del Mar). These are concerns our community has been expressing regarding Route B for quite some time. In addition, many of the stakeholder concerns called out in the Value Analysis as being unique to NOP Route A (VA Route 14 and the route Mayor Hebner has been advocating against) eg. “exhaust and emissions venting out of portals”, “noise and pollution with tunnel”, “construction fatigue for residents”, “community buy-in for route seems challenging”, “would affect many sources of the City’s tax revenue”, “would have to go under some residential houses”, in fact apply to all three NOP Routes but for whatever reason only show up in the stakeholder comments as being concerns relevant for Route A.

These stakeholder interview comments are clearly comments and not facts or insights based on study or research as of yet. The comments aren’t weighed with regards to the scope of their impact or organized in a manner that aligns with the project objectives. We see a comprehensive laundry list of comments regarding the concerns with Route A, and a much less comprehensive list regarding the concerns with Route B (or even C). Why were so many of our key concerns regarding Route B omitted? It’s a huge miss. And, clearly the number of comments does not equal value.

There were also several comments about concerns regarding the Fairgrounds verbalized in different ways. Again, these are comments not facts or insights identified as a result of studies. To dismiss a route based on comments vs. facts and insights gained as a result of an actual study is cause for concern. How thorough was this VA process and how much should these not-so-comprehensive stakeholder comments weigh in the decision to eliminate route A before any studies or analysis can be done? In conclusion, please:
1) Advance the proposed “yellow” route and variations of it for future study and serious consideration 2) Study, confirm and quantify the scope of impact to communities that would result from each of the 4 proposed routes (Yellow Route and VA Routes 12, 14, 15 and 16) 3) Advance VA Route 14 for future study and serious consideration (including the version of route A identified by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition (which is different than route A from that showed up in the NOP)
At the end of the day, we all want a solution that would minimize impacts to all communities.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully Submitted,
Jennifer Anderson
Del Mar Resident
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Jennifer Anderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:53 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: [email protected]; Terry Gaasterland; Dan Quirk; Ashley Jones; [email protected]; John Spelich-private
Subject: Red Dot Re: Feb 18th Agenda Item #2: Presentation Regarding San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment Value Analysis Process
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 following red-dot email to the City Council for the 02/18/25 meeting. Thank you.

Honorable Mayor Gaasterland and Distinguished Members of the Del Mar City Council and Distinguished visiting SANDAG Representatives:

I am a Del Mar resident and have been following the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project for more than a year now.

Thank you to the SANDAG engineers and team, to the Del Mar City Staff and City Council and to the engaged citizens of Del Mar for your hard work and the countless hours you have put into identifying, not just roadblocks or problems, but potential solutions that could work for our region to achieve the goals of this project and minimize impacts to our communities. Here are my comments on the Value Analysis (“VA”):

Comment 1: Advance new “yellow” route (and variations of it as outlined in Red Dots) for further study I am encouraged by the proposed new “yellow” route and the variations of it suggested in Red Dot comments for this meeting. I would like to see this route and its variations advanced to the next phase of the project for further analysis and serious consideration. This is a potential route that all stakeholders should be able to rally around.

Comment 2: Quantify and confirm the scope of impact to communities with each route (Yellow Route and VA Routes 12, 14, 15 and 16)
There is a lot of ambiguity around how our homes, businesses and towns will be impacted with this project and each of the prospective routes. Currently, there hasn’t been communicated or published in any public documents a quantification of these anticipated impacts with respect to each route. Yet it appears that one of the routes, NOP Route A (similar to route 14 in the VA), is being eliminated as a result of this Value Analysis because of concerns that the process of constructing Route A would “make a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years.”
This is not a statement or finding we have seen confirmed by SANDAG or identified in any of the public information provided as a result of SANDAG’s studies, so we all could use some clarification on this matter.

The questions I have for SANDAG are:
1) Please weigh in on your position on this. Is it the conclusion of SANDAG and your engineers that you have not been able to determine (and do not expect to be able to determine) ANY way of constructing NOP Route A/VA February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 Route 14 (or a version of) without requiring making a significant portion of the Fairgrounds unusable for seven to 10 years? Is there no way to minimize these impacts to the Fairgrounds during the construction process? 2) You have a capable engineering team. Have they been challenged with this question – how can we implement NOP Route A/VA Route 14 without requiring the significant closure of the fairgrounds and disruption of business? If so, what is their conclusion or potential solutions?
We all are in agreement that the Fairgrounds is an important economic and cultural engine for our region and we most definitely want it to be successful now and far into the future. 3) Alignment A in the NOP is a modified version of the Alignment A solution initially proposed by the Del Mar citizens. Please address why the original Alignment A, as proposed by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition, was dismissed.

Comment 3: Advance VA Route 14 (and variations of it) for future study and serious consideration In reading through the stakeholder interview comments in the Value Analysis on pages 125-131, I was very surprised to see that there was no mention at all of the concerns for Imminent Domain or Trains Running Under Homes with regards to the original Crest Canyon NOP Route B (VA Route 15 and the route going under the neighborhoods of Del Mar). These are concerns our community has been expressing regarding Route B for quite some time. In addition, many of the stakeholder concerns called out in the Value Analysis as being unique to NOP Route A (VA Route 14 and the route Mayor Hebner has been advocating against) eg. “exhaust and emissions venting out of portals”, “noise and pollution with tunnel”, “construction fatigue for residents”, “community buy-in for route seems challenging”, “would affect many sources of the City’s tax revenue”, “would have to go under some residential houses”, in fact apply to all three NOP Routes but for whatever reason only show up in the stakeholder comments as being concerns relevant for Route A.

These stakeholder interview comments are clearly comments and not facts or insights based on study or research as of yet. The comments aren’t weighed with regards to the scope of their impact or organized in a manner that aligns with the project objectives. We see a comprehensive laundry list of comments regarding the concerns with Route A, and a much less comprehensive list regarding the concerns with Route B (or even C). Why were so many of our key concerns regarding Route B omitted? It’s a huge miss. And, clearly the number of comments does not equal value.

There were also several comments about concerns regarding the Fairgrounds verbalized in different ways. Again, these are comments not facts or insights identified as a result of studies. To dismiss a route based on comments vs. facts and insights gained as a result of an actual study is cause for concern. How thorough was this VA process and how much should these not-so-comprehensive stakeholder comments weigh in the decision to eliminate route A before any studies or analysis can be done?
In conclusion, please:
1) Advance the proposed “yellow” route and variations of it for future study and serious consideration 2) Study, confirm and quantify the scope of impact to communities that would result from each of the 4 proposed routes (Yellow Route and VA Routes 12, 14, 15 and 16) 3) Advance VA Route 14 for future study and serious consideration (including the version of route A identified by the Del Mar Safer Trains Coalition (which is different than route A from that showed up in the NOP)
At the end of the day, we all want a solution that would minimize impacts to all communities.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully Submitted,
February 18, 2025 Item 02
3 Jennifer Anderson
Del Mar Resident
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Laura DeMarco <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:26 PM
To: Terry Gaasterland; Tracy Martinez; John Spelich-private; Dan Quirk Cc: Ashley Jones; City Clerk Mail Box; Bruce Smith
Subject: Red dot Item 2: questions for SANDAG
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,
It is surprising that double-tracking Del Mar’s unstable bluffs is included in SANDAG’s rail alignment options. This is not a viable long-term option given the bluff’s instability and continual erosion that endangers the existing single track. It also violates SANDAG’s agreement with the Coastal Commission, specifically the conditions for Bluff Stabilization Project #5.

The tunneling options need much more detail such as the following:
1) the exact number and location of houses subject to eminent domain; 2) noise and view impacts on nearby properties and how they would be mitigated; 3) schematics of the north and south portals including elevations of the track and nearby roads or bridges; 4) construction timing and if it could be staggered so as not to interfere with summer tourism season, especially during horse racing;
5) location of staging area;
6) amount of material that would be excavated and if it could be removed by rail car instead of trucks; 7) if any of the excavated material could be used to replenish our beaches or to construct the living levees in our Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan;
8) number of days that Camino Del Mar could be blocked by construction and the negative economic impact on Del Mar’s businesses and city revenue from lost sales tax and TOT; and 9) seismic impacts on nearby structures from freight trains and how they can be mitigated.

Has SANDAG consulted with the San Dieguito River Park JPA, San Dieguito River Park Conservancy, Sierra Club, Surfrider, and Coastal Commission on the rail realignment through the lagoon? Thanks,
Laura
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Mark Rittenbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:50 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot to Agenda item 2- Lossan Update
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 Members of Del Mar, I want to acknowledge all the hard that has gone into the Value Analysis.

Yet, to put it it in polite terms the Value Analysis and realignment recommendations made by SANDAG staff are disappointing. Overall it continues to prioritize train speed, enhancing train service, along with political pressure over:
minimizing impacts to communities, public safety, the environment, and potential affects of climate change.

A cynic could conclude the proposed realignments are purposely meant to antagonize, threaten and divide the Del Mar community. Del Mar solely bears the consequences of all options seemingly by design. All options except one would be totally devasting to Del Mar. This one option, the “yellow line” ( San Dieguito Bridge to I-5 Knoll), still has negative consequences and potentially fatal flaws when studied in the EIR, leaving Del Mar with nothing but devastation. One option, double tracking the bluff, seems to be targeted as a threat. Choose your poison Del Mar.

The Value Analysis is unduly constrained by holding constant that the Events Platform and Double Tracking of The San Dieguito Bridge MUST proceed before the EIR is completed , and that it MUST proceed as currently designed with NO changes or enhancements. This in and of itself biases the study, and the realignment options being considered.

Looking at rays of light, one option, the yellow line, holds some promise with modifications. It is note worthy that with this line SANDAG acknowledges trains would operate at reduced speeds to make the necessary turn, in an effort to minimize impacts to communities. However It is has not been fully studied nor ready for prime time, as evidenced that this route did not make it to the list of realignment options in the VA. Already there are constructive modifications being suggested to this line to address community concerns and minimize impacts to all communities.

Specifically, and respectfully, : 1) SANDAG should delay taking Board action at is February 28 meeting. it is premature for SANDAG to hold a Board meeting to choose realignment options until more flesh can be put on the bone with the yellow line, and it is modified to take into account proposed enhancements; 2) double tracking on the bluffs option should be eliminated, as it will never get necessary approvals and is a waste of taxpayer money, 3) a derivation of alternative 14 which minimize impacts to communities, should remain an option. Certainly with dialog this option can remain an option which has less devastating impacts to communities that Routes 15 and 16 (original A & B).

If SANDAG were to choose to proceed with taking action at its February 28 Board meeting, again respectfully , in regards to the yellow line, the description to as to exactly where the line makes its turn from the existing line, should be less precise (perhaps Events Platform to I-5 Knoll) . This will allow some leeway to exam the best alternative which minimizes impacts all communities and the environment, for an option that has yet to be fleshed to (as evidenced by its omission February 18, 2025 Item 02
2 from the VA). Leaving the yellow. line and description as precisely illustrated has unnecessary flaws that will be harder to overcome during study).

I encourage the SANDAG management team and its Board to be more open and transparent with the public, and begin to rebuild trust. The lack of material information in the prior draft NOP, along with purported private sidebar conversations of material information, along with no corroboration or corrections of material statements aby the public or public officials of purported fact are totally unacceptable.

Public disclosure documents such as the NOP and EIR should provide information the public derserves, understanding that this disclosure may need caveats surrounding the information. SANDAG has the information. Examples include: a range of potential homes and businesses subject to imminent domain, approximate number of homes and businesses for which the trains will travel under, depth of tunnels under homes, estimated length of time businesses ( including Fairgrounds) may be shut down or disrupted. There should be NO sidebar conversations of material information that then get publicly attributed to SANDAG, for which then SANDAG neither confirms or denies.

Lastly, I appeal to the SANDAG management team led by its CEO Mr. Orso, and its Board of Directors. I appeal to your humanity and to search your souls; to do the right thing; to show compassion. The current situation on the bluffs is untenable long term. We understand this, and that potential realignment solutions are not easy . Yet the bluff stabilization projects afford us the time to get the solutions right.

Decisions being made today regarding these solutions will have profound affects on peoples lives, communities, and the environment for the next 100 years or more, a potential legacy of goodness and good heartedness or of destruction and devastation. I urge you to seek the former.

Respectfully,
Mark Rittenbaum
Del Mar
Sent from my iPad
February 18, 2025 Item 02
From: Ricardo del Rio <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 2:23 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box <[email protected]>
Subject: LOSSAN Rail Alignment
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 Ricardo del Río, a resident of San Diego County and I a writing to advocate for SANDAG/LOSSAN, NCTD, BNSF, the Department of Defense and all affected local municipalities to augment the California State Rail Plan in such a manner that comprehensively addresses the rail transportation needs into the future. I am advocation for the Oceanside to Sorrento Valley I-5 configuration.

By SANDAG’s own reporting in State of the
Commute https://opendata.sandag.org/stories/s/2023-State-of-the-Commute/wmpexqcq/ the costal rail route is underperforming not for the lack of double tracking but due to the fact that each of the five stations/platforms have accessibility issues to potential riders who reside east of I-5. Another structural issue that constrains consistent ridership is the limited parking near and around the current stations/platforms and the impact the additional parking would have on residents, local merchants, emergency responders for example.

February 18, 2025 Item 02
The fact that the scope of the current SANDAG San Diego LOSSAN Rail Realignment Project is limited by geographic boundaries fails to address the structural flaws of the rail line north through San Clemente in many ways.

Are leaders building a Dr. Seuss contraption or …?
RdR
February 18, 2025 Item 02
February 18, 2025 Item 02
February 18, 2025 Item 02
1 Melinda Gould
From: Rita Clement <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 4:15 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: District 3 candidate 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.

Councilmember Teresa Acosta's vast qualifications and critical experience make her the right candidate:
• Air quality Consultant to Governing Board at South Coast Air Pollution Control District • Carlsbad representative at the following agencies
oLeague of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee oClean Energy Alliance
oCarlsbad Chamber of Commerce
oEncina Wastewater Authority
oNorth County Transit District (Alternate)
• Rita Clement
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Ann Feeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 5:34 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: item #10 APCD
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I strongly hope that Mayor Gaasterland will vote for Teresa Acosta to be appointed as the District 3 representative to San Diego’s Air Pollution Control District (APCD) when the second balloting takes place on March 10. Teresa is highly qualified for this appointment. She served as an air quality consultant to the South Coast Air Quality Management District so she is already highly knowledgeable about these issues. She is on Carlsbad City Council and has been for several of years. She has much experience in inter-governmental collaboration. She was on the Board of Directors of the League of California Cities, and on the Board of Directors of the San Diego County Water Authority, as well as representing Carlsbad on CEA and NCTD. She is a strong environmentalist. The APCD plays a critical role in managing the air quality in the San Diego region. This is especially important when the federal government is weakening and dismantling the EPA. Clear air is so important for all us us.

Teresa Acosta’s nomination for District 3 APCD is endorsed by SanDiego350, Climate Action Campaign, Environmental Health Coalition and Sierra Club. Three of Del Mar’s 4 councilmembers are endorsed by the Sierra Club, including Mayor Gaasterland. All of these environmental groups support Teresa because of her strong credentials. I hope that Del Mar will also support Teresa for appointment to the APCD.

Thank you
Ann Feeney
524 Rimini Rd
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 10
February 14, 2024
Re: Agenda Item 10 (Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda 2/18/25) Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
My name is Harold Standerfer and I am contacting you on behalf of the North County Coastal Group (which includes Del Mar) of the San Diego Sierra Club. We wish to express our preference and concerns regarding the selection of the representative from Supervisor District 3 to the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Board.

Our group is in support of the appointment of Council Member Teresa Acosta from the City of Carlsbad. Ms Acosta is imminently qualified to represent our district on the APCD Board. She has experience in air quality having served as an air quality consultant to governing board members of the South Coast Air Pollution Control District. She has also represented the City of Carlsbad on several regional organizations including the League of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee, the Clean Energy Alliance, Encina Wastewater Authority and the North County Transit District (alternate).

Ms. Acosta’s experience coupled with her commitment to improve air quality and safeguarding the environment make her an excellent choice to serve on the San Diego APCD Board and represent the citizens of District 3. It is crucial that representatives who serve on this Board be committed to improvement of air quality across our region and the entire county. As the environmental protections that have been in place for more than fifty years are being dismantled at the federal level, experienced and committed representation on the APCD is more important than ever.

We are requesting that direction be given to the Del Mar representative on the committee responsible for the selection of members to the APCD to support Ms. Acosta.

Thank you for your consideration.

Harold Standerfer
Chair Person of the Political Committee, North County Coastal Group of the Sierra Club San Diego Chapter.

February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Daria Flores <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 10:27 PM
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 Council Members,
Please join the mayors of San Diego, Solana Beach, and Carlsbad, and vote for Teresa Acosta for the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

The other candidate, Mayor of Coronado John Duncan, lacks experience for the position, while Theresa has extensive experience and a commitment to improving air quality and preserving the environment.

She would be an excellent fit.

Thank you,
Daria Flores
399 Stratford Ct. #213
from my iPhone
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Charles Rilli <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 8:06 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item #10
Attachments: Letter Supporting Teresa Acosta.docx.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To the Del Mar City Clerk,
I am writing to submit a written comment from the Sierra Club to Mayor Gaasterland and the full Del Mar city council for item #10 on tomorrow’s agenda.

Thanks,
Charles Rilli
February 18, 2025 Item 10
February 13, 2025
Mayor Terry Gaasterland
City of Del Mar
1050 Camino Del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
Re: Air Pollution Control Board Appointment
Dear Mayor Gaasterland,
On behalf of the Sierra Club San Diego Chapter, we urge the Del Mar City Council to support the appointment of Teresa Acosta of Carlsbad to the Air Pollution Control District, Supervisorial District 3 seat.

The Air Pollution Control District’s criteria for member selection clearly state “All members shall be appointed on the basis of their demonstrated interest and proven ability in the field of air pollution control and their understanding of the needs of the general public in connection with the air pollution problems of the San Diego Air Basin.” Teresa Acosta meets this criteria perfectly. As a consultant to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Teresa has firsthand knowledge of the successes and challenges that face our Air Pollution regulatory body. This gives her a unique perspective and knowledge to hit the ground running and deliver results for our region. Teresa has also represented the city of Carlsbad at several regional organizations: League of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee and San Diego County Water Authority Board of Directors. Her experience combined with her commitment to improving air quality and preserving the environment make her an excellent fit for the SDAPCD.

The Air Pollution Control District is critical to our region’s efforts to continue to build healthier, safer communities. We are currently facing unprecedented challenges with air quality in the region. San Diego county continues to attract new warehouse projects from Oceanside to Otay Mesa that emit large amounts of pollution. We need an air quality champion selected to fight for our communities, fight for clean air, and bring results to the region.

Thank you for your consideration,
Lisa Ross Sally Prendergast
San Diego Sierra Club San Diego Sierra Club
Chapter Chair North County Coastal Group Chair
4241 Jutland Dr., Ste. 303, San Diego, CA. 92117 | TEL: 858-569-6005 | http://sandiego.sierraclub.org February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Diane Nygaard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 8:49 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Comments On # 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 urge you to support Teresa Acosta for the Air Pollution Control District. She brings to this her knowledge about air quality issues, experience with local government, and a commitment to get things done.

All valuable attributes for this important position.

Diane Nygaard
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 1:27 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Tracy Martinez; [email protected]; Terry Gaasterland; Dan Quirk; Sudeepto Roy Subject: Red Dot: Reference: Clerk’s File No. 1403-1 item #10 Appointment to the Air Pollution Control District Governing Board -District 3
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 Gaasterland and Councilmembers,
I am writing to request discussion and alignment within the Council in support Teresa Acosta’s appointment to the District 3 seat on the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Governing Board.

As you may know, Teresa brings substantial experience in air quality, having served as an air quality consultant to governing board members at the South Coast Air Pollution Control District. This expertise will allow her to quickly make an impact and deliver meaningful results for our region.

Additionally, Teresa has been an active representative for the city of Carlsbad across several important regional organizations, including the League of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee, Clean Energy Alliance, Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, Encina Wastewater Authority, and North County Transit District (Alternate). Her background in these areas demonstrates her commitment to environmental progress and community leadership.

I urge our Councilmembers to align with the APCD's mission to address air quality to protect public health and the environment by supporting a candidate with both the experience and dedication needed to make a positive impact.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Valerie Dufort-Roy & Sudeepto Roy
Klish Way
February 18, 2025 Item 10
February 17, 2025
RE: APCD Governing Board for District 3
Mayor Gaasterland and Del Mar Council Members,
CleanEarth4Kids.org strongly believes the best candidate for this position must be a strong advocate for clean air to protect children’s health and future, wildlife, and the environment.

We ask you to make your selection based on their qualifications, their experience and track record in stopping air pollution, protecting clean air and ensuring public health.

Air Pollution is Toxic
Air pollution harms nearly every cell and organ
1 in the human body and increases
the risks of illnesses, cancers, diseases, and Covid-19. 2,3 Pregnant women,4 children,5
seniors,
6 and people with preexisting health conditions are most7 severely impacted.

The burning of fossil fuels causes increased temperatures, driving climate change and the devastating consequences seen worldwide, especially in the Global South. 8 This area has seen significant warming, droughts,
9 erosion,10 and desertification11
due to a decline in rainfall. The consequent scarce water and food availability results in the deaths of in the deaths both humans and wildlife. 12 The increase in severe
weather events,
13 storms, flooding,14 and rising sea levels15 also threaten all living organisms on Earth.

We are in a climate emergency.
16 Air Pollution Harms Pregnant Women and Children
Air pollution harms pregnant women and children. Childhood exposure to PM2.5 is 16 https://www.msf.org/climate-emergency
15 https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-leve 14 https://www.edf.org/climate/climate-change-and-extreme-weather 13 https://www.c2es.org/content/extreme-weather-and-climate-change/ 12 https://www.washington.edu/news/2023/02/27/hw-conflict-climate-change/ 11 https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-desertification-and-the-role-of-climate-change/ 10 https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-desertification-and-the-role-of-climate-change/erosion 9 https://www.nature.com/articles/d44148-023-00026-1
8 https://gceurope.org/global-north-and-global-south-how-climate-change-uncovers-global-inequalities/ 7 https://www.epa.gov/air-research/research-health-effects-air-pollution 6 https://www.airnow.gov/air-quality-and-health/older-adults/# 5 https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-risk/disparities 4 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22856675/
3 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2020.580057/full 2 https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/02/air-pollution-covid-19-public-health-emergency-threat 1 https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/air-quality-and-health/health-impacts 1 February 18, 2025 Item 10
linked to asthma,
17 which is the leading cause of school absences18 and the third leading cause of hospitalizations among children under 15. 19 Poor air quality
increases the likelihood of asthma attacks, breathing difficulty, 20 increased
emergency room visits,
21 , and hospitalization.
22 Air pollution can also inflame the
brain, central nervous system, and hearts in children.
23,24
As pregnant women inhale polluted air, pollutants travel to the tissues, brain, liver, lungs, and organs of the fetus.
25,26 Black carbon can enter the placenta, circulation
system, and the organs of the fetus via the mother’s blood. 27,28
Exposure to air pollution during pregnancy and infancy
29 is linked to increased rates
of stillbirth,
30 preterm birth,31
low birth weight,
32 SIDS (Sudden Infant Death
Syndrome),
33 and decreased development of the brain, among other long-term severe effects.
34 Exposure to air pollution, even at relatively low levels during pregnancy and childhood, significantly harms children’s health.
35 Maternal exposure to air pollution: PM2.5,
36 nitric oxide (NO),37 and diesel exhaust
during pregnancy increases the risk of ASD, Autism Spectrum Disorder, a lifelong complex neurodevelopmental condition that affects speech, behavior, thought patterns, interactions, and communication.
38 It is imperative that we reduce air pollution to protect children’s health, development and growth, learning and communication abilities, and future. Air pollution harms unborn babies.
39 The two slides below (from Dr. Paul Fowler's extensive research, webinar, and presentation) clearly show a 26% increase in stillbirths when air pollution is increased by 10 μg/m3.
40,41
41 https://www.healthandenvironment.org/assets/images/CHE%20Jan%202023%20Fowler.pdf 40 https://youtu.be/40Ga9_StJQ0
39 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36208643/
38 https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1408133
37 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2714386 36 https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/air-pollution-linked-with-increased-risk-of-autism-in-children/ 35 https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-risk/children-and-air-pollution 34 https://www.washington.edu/news/2022/07/12/uw-link-between-air-pollution-and-child-brain-development 33 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653520337139 32 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22726801/
31 https://med.nyu.edu/pediatrics/divisions/environmental-pediatrics/air-pollution-preterm-births 30 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749121003328 29 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2767260 28 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36719212/
27 https://www.livescience.com/black-carbon-reaches-placenta.html 26 https://www.theguardian.com/toxic-air-pollution-particles-found-in-lungs-and-brains-of-unborn-babies 25 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32556259/
24 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35921508
23 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7352229 22 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6546668/ 21 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2801735? 20 https://resphealth.org/clean-air/understanding-air-pollution/ 19 https://www.epa.gov/children/childrens-environmental-health-facts 18 https://aafa.org/asthma/asthma-facts
17 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022002240 2 February 18, 2025 Item 10
Fossil Fuels and Petrochemicals Harm the Brain, Increase Birth Defects and Learning Disabilities, and Lower Reading and Math Scores Air pollution from fossil fuels and petrochemicals increases the risk of asthma and infant mortality
42 and has a significant detrimental impact on human health,43 the
brain, and the cognitive abilities of children.
44,45 Exposure to air pollutants, such as
PM2.5, NO2, and ozone, and heavy metals, such as lead, arsenic, and mercury, are associated with lower academic performance ,
46 attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD) symptoms,
47 behavioral problems, and autism spectrum disorders in children.
48 48 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dmcn.14758 47 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30909100/
46 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8663889/ 45 https://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Abstract/2020/09000 44 https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/07-08/smog
43 https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/air-pollution/index.cfm 42 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2727943/ 3 February 18, 2025 Item 10
Air pollution inflames the brain, causes oxidative stress, endocrine disruption, epigenetic modifications, and changes in brain structure, resulting in neurological disorders, accelerated cognitive decline, and impairment. 49,50
Exposure to PM 2.5 (particulate matter) is correlated with reduced cortical thickness, thinner gray weight, and reduced learning, memory, and information processing. 51,52
Exposure to heavy metals and toxic chemicals: mercury, lead, manganese and their compounds, and petrochemicals, including isoamyl alcohol, methanol, xylene, toluene, styrene, n-hexane, and ethylbenzene, are shown to lower cognitive abilities and reading and math scores.
53 Air Pollution Harms Public Health
Air pollution is a global health crisis. The World Health Organization identified air pollution as the most significant environmental risk to human health. 54 Air pollution
from the burning of fossil fuels is responsible for 8.7 million deaths globally, ending the lives of 1 in 5 people worldwide in 2018.
55,56
Fossil fuel combustion is extremely harmful to public health. 57 Air pollution increases
rates of asthma, cancer, and neurological diseases, such as dementia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and increased depression in older adults.
58,59 Additionally, air pollution
reduces strategic thinking: “The results highlight the relevance of indoor air quality for strategic decision making, an integral aspect of management in firms and a critical factor influencing the survival of firms in competitive environments… In addition, our estimates provide compelling evidence of the damages of deficient air filtration in office buildings or any other indoor space where individuals are required to undertake strategic decisions.”
60 Fossil fuel combustion is a leading cause of deadly PM2.5 exposure. 61 Extended
exposure to PM2.5 is responsible for 62% of all deaths from air pollution in 2019. 62 PM 2.5 is especially deadly because its small size allows it to enter deep into the lungs and pass into the bloodstream, making it a significant contributor to 62 https://www.stateofglobalair.org/health/pm#major-impacts 61 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23853-y
60 https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/02/air-pollution-strategic-thinking 59 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2801241 58 https://www.alzinfo.org/articles/diagnosis/growing-evidence-links-air-pollution-to-alzheimers-disease/ 57 https://source.colostate.edu/fossil-fuels-are-bad-for-your-health-and-harmful 56 https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/fossil-fuel-air-pollution-responsible-for-1-in-5-deaths-worldwide 55 https://www.nrdc.org/stories/fossil-fuel-air-pollution-kills-one-five-people 54 https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/science/environment/air-pollution-environmental-risk-health/ 53 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.add0285
52 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6132565/ 51 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6908886/ 50 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278262608001747 49 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.add0285
4 February 18, 2025 Item 10
cardiovascular disease and mortality.
63,64,65 PM2.5 also increases heart disease, lung
cancer, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), lower-respiratory infections, pneumonia, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and other serious conditions, including gastrointestinal illness.
66,67 People with tuberculosis exposed to PM2.5 had increased replication of the disease.
68 PM2.5 impacts our most vulnerable populations, to
including minorities,
69 the elderly,
70 pregnant women,71 and children.72
Increased
Particulate Matter reduced the health-related quality of life among the elderly, increasing pain and discomfort, anxiety, and depression. 73 Air Pollution From Fossil Fuels is a Public Health, Racial, Social, Environmental, and Climate Justice Issue
Air pollution from the burning of fossil fuels harms Black, low-income communities, and people of color disproportionately.
74,75 The extraction of fossil fuels has a
detrimental impact on Indigenous communities.
76 Annually, the United States Oil and Gas Industry releases about 9 million tons of methane gas and other toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. 77 Exposure to poor air
quality can cause numerous health problems, such as emphysema and asthma. 78 Increased rates of asthma can lead to significant health disparities and reduced quality of life.
79 Approximately 13.4% of Black children and 7.3% of White children are affected by asthma.
80 In total, Black Americans are 75% more likely than White Americans to live in “fence-line” communities (areas near commercial facilities that produce noise, odor, traffic, or emissions that directly affect the population). 81 For example, more than one million Black Americans live within a half-mile of natural gas facilities, over one million Black Americans face a “cancer risk above EPA’s level of concern” due to unclean air, and more than 6.7 million Black 81 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/magazine/pollution-philadelphia-black-americans.html 80 https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/8/15/racial-disparities-and-climate-change 79 https://aafa.org/asthma-allergy-research/our-research/asthma-disparities-burden-on-minorities/ 78 https://www.catf.us/2017/11/study-african-american-health-impacts-oil-gas-pollution/ 77 https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/8/15/racial-disparities-and-climate-change 76 https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fossil-fuel-extraction 75 https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-risk/disparities 74 https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/8/15/racial-disparities-and-climate-change 73 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651323002944 72 https://parentingscience.com/the-effects-of-air-pollution-on-children 71 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935122003930 70 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651323002944 69 https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/racial-ethnic-minorities-low-income-groups-u-s-air-pollution/ 68 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935123004875 67 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651323002063 66 https://www.stateofglobalair.org/health/pm
65 https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/what-makes-air-unhealthy/particle-pollution 64 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.120.016890 63 https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effects-particulate-matter-pm 5 February 18, 2025 Item 10
Americans live in the 91 US counties with oil refineries. 82 Communities living near oil, gas, and coal extraction sites face serious health risks such as respiratory problems, cancer, and congenital disabilities. These communities tend to be low-income and composed of racial minorities and indigenous individuals.

The EPA reports that these groups are more likely to suffer health consequences from exposure to fossil fuels, including “the development of heart or lung diseases, such as asthma and bronchitis, increased susceptibility to respiratory and cardiac symptoms, greater numbers of emergency room visits and hospital admissions, and premature deaths.”
83 Individuals living near coal power plants face higher risks of respiratory disease, lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, and other health problems because coal combustion releases dangerous pollutants such as mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide, and PM.
84 Similarly, communities located near oil or natural gas production report “respiratory problems like asthma and coughing, eye, nose, and throat irritation, headaches, nausea, dizziness, trouble sleeping, and fatigue.” 85 There is a direct correlation between ambient air pollution and negative birth outcomes, including low birth weight, intrauterine growth retardation, preterm birth, and fetal mortality.
86,87
The decisions we make today affect our children’s health and future.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Hume
Educational Director and Founder
[email protected]
CleanEarth4Kids.org
87 https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/155/1/17/134147 86 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470072/ 85 https://earthworks.org/issues/oil-and-gas-health-effects/ 84 https://surgery.duke.edu/news/despite-studies-health-effects-coal-burning-power-plants-remain 83 https://www.epa.gov/power-sector/power-plants-and-neighboring-communities 82 http://www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CATF_Pub_FumesAcrossTheFenceLine.pdf 6 February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Ann Feeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 12:55 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 10 Feb 18 agenda APCD appointment
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.

I strongly hope that Mayor Gaasterland will vote for Teresa Acosta to be appointed as the District 3 representative to San Diego’s Air Pollution Control District (APCD) when the second balloting takes place on March 10. Teresa is highly qualified for this appointment. She served as an air quality consultant to the South Coast Air Quality Management District so she is already highly knowledgeable about these issues. She is on Carlsbad City Council and has been for several of years. She has much experience in inter-governmental collaboration. She was on the Board of Directors of the League of California Cities, and on the Board of Directors of the San Diego County Water Authority, as well as representing Carlsbad on CEA and NCTD. She is a strong environmentalist. The APCD plays a critical role in managing the air quality in the San Diego region. This is especially important when the federal government is weakening and dismantling the EPA. Clear air is so important for all us us.

Teresa Acosta’s nomination for District 3 APCD is endorsed by SanDiego350, Climate Action Campaign, Environmental Health Coalition and Sierra Club. Three of Del Mar’s 4 councilmembers are endorsed by the Sierra Club, including Mayor Gaasterland. All of these environmental groups support Teresa because of her strong credentials. I hope that Del Mar will also support Teresa for appointment to the APCD.

Thank you
Ann Feeney
524 Rimini Rd
Del Mar
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Paige DeCino <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 9:34 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Public comment - City Council meeting Item
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.

Mayor, council members,
I'm requesting that the council take the necessary steps today to support Carlsbad council member Teresa Acosta to serve as the District 3 representative on the San Diego Air Pollution Control District board. Ms. Acosta has extensive experience in air quality and would be an excellent representative for our area.

Thank you,
Paige DeCino
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Hello C4GS-ZEDLIFE <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:11 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: 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 ,
Councilmember Teresa Acosta's extensive qualifications and critical experience make her an excellent candidate for consideration. Her roles include:
* Air Quality Consultant to the Governing Board at the South Coast Air Pollution Control District * Carlsbad Representative at the League of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee * Carlsbad Representative at the Clean Energy Alliance
* Member of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce
* Member of the Encina Wastewater Authority
* Alternate Representative at the North County Transit District In Gratitude,
Team C4GS-ZEDLIFE
[email protected]
Schedule A Meeting
Office: 619.630.5730
Web: www.c4gs.org
Facebook: @c4gszedlife
"Powering communities with primary income builds more than a building, it leaves a legacy of suitability and self-sufficiency" A. Fox
*(em)powered with by UA360º
In Gratitude,
Team C4GS-ZEDLIFE
[email protected]
Schedule A Meeting
Office: 619.630.5730
Web: www.c4gs.org
February 18, 2025 Item 10
2 Facebook: @c4gszedlife
"Powering communities with primary income builds more than a building, it leaves a legacy of suitability and self-sufficiency" A. Fox
*(em)powered with by UA360º
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Nicholas Paul <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:37 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: X. Appointment to the Air Pollution Control District Governing Board -District Attachments: Del Mar City Council Letter-6.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.

Good afternoon Sarah Krietor,
My name is Nicholas Paul. I am an Air Quality Policy Advocate with the Environmental Health Coalition and I’d like to submit this letter of support for councilmember Teresa Acosta of Carlsbad as the District 3 representative for the Air Pollution Control District. The listed labor unions and environmental/ environmental justice non-profits believe councilmember Acosta to be highly qualified to serve on the Air Pollution Control District and urge the Del Mar City Council to direct Mayor Gaasterland to vote for Councilmember Acosta at the March 10 City Selection Committee meeting.

Please let us know if there are any questions regarding the letter.

Kindly,
NICHOLAS PAúL · AIR QUALITY ADVOCATE (HE/HIM/HIS)
Environmental Health Coalition | Environmental Health & Justice Campaign 2727 Hoover Avenue, Suite 202, National City, CA 91950
Office (619) 474 0220 x 141 | Cell (619) 373-5727
EHC WEB | EHC TWITTER | EHC FACEBOOK
EMPOWERING PEOPLE · ORGANIZING COMMUNITIES · ACHIEVING JUSTICE February 18, 2025 Item 10
February 17, 2025
Council Chambers
1050 Camino Del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
To Mayor Gaasterland and City Council,
We are very pleased to have the opportunity to provide our recommendation for the County District 3 seat on the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Governing Board. The coalition below is made up of some of the leading non-profit and labor organizations in San Diego County advocating for cleaner, safer, and healthier communities. The organizations below share a common belief that all people regardless of zip code have the right to live, work, and play in a clean and safe environment.

Unfortunately, many communities throughout San Diego County continue rank among the most pollution burdened in the state of California.1 Recent studies from the American Lung Association’s 2024 State of the Air Report, ranked San Diego County as 8
th worst for high ozone days out of 228 metropolitan areas throughout the country.2 Our county remains in unattainment status for federal and state ozone (8-hour) thresholds, and for state PM 2.5 and Pm10 thresholds.3 These air quality conditions result in negative community health outcomes and impacts on our local economy. San Diego residents need passionate and experienced leadership at the Air Pollution Control District to address these urgent air quality issues.

We write this letter today to respectfully request that the Del Mar City Council support Carlsbad Councilmember Teresa Acosta as the County District 3 representative on the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD), and give the directive to Mayor Terry Gaasterland to support Teresa Acosta at the March 10 City Selection Committee Meeting.

Councilmember Acosta has over a decade of experience in air quality policy and advocacy — serving over the last 5 years as an air quality consultant to governing board members in the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Teresa’s experience and understanding of the jurisdictional limits of air district policy will enable her to hit the ground running and deliver urgently needed results for our region. Her experience combined with her commitment to improving air quality and preserving the environment make her the most qualified person to serve on this board.

Our organizations look forward to your support of Councilmember Teresa Acosta to represent County District 3 at APCD to reduce air pollution in San Diego.

Kindly,
• Environmental Health Coalition
• Climate Action Campaign
• IBEW Local 569
• San Diego 350
1 https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/11d2f52282a54ceebcac7428e6184203/page/CalEnviroScreen-4_0/ 2 https://www.lung.org/research/sota
3 https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/community/annual-air-qualityreports/2023/2023%20SDAPCD%20Annual%20Air%20Quality%20Report.pdf February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Jennifer Anderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:55 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: [email protected]; Terry Gaasterland; Dan Quirk; Ashley Jones; [email protected]; John Spelich-private
Subject: Red Dot Re: Feb 18th Agenda Item #10: Appointment to the Air Pollution Control District Governing Board -District 3
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 following red-dot email to the City Council for the 02/18/25 meeting. Thank you.

Honorable Mayor and distinguished members of the City Council:

Please support Teresa Acosta for the Air Pollution Control District D3 seat at the March 10th City Selection Committee Meeting. Her technical and professional experience working in air quality will bring valuable insights to this important committee.

Teresa has critical prior experience in air quality — serving as an air quality consultant to governing board members in the South Coast Air Pollution Control District — which will enable her to hit the ground running and deliver results for our region. Teresa has also represented the city of Carlsbad at several regional organizations:

League of California Cities Environmental Quality Committee, Clean Energy Alliance, Encina Wastewater Authority, Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, and North County Transit District (Alternate).

Her experience combined with her commitment to improving air quality and preserving the environment make her an excellent fit for the SDAPCD.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully Submitted,
Jennifer Anderson
Del Mar Resident
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Charles Rilli <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:58 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item #10
Attachments: Mayor Gaasterland.pdf
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,
Please find the attached letter for item #10 on tonight’s Del Mar City Council agenda.

This is a follow up letter from the first submitted yesterday.

Thanks,
Charles Rilli
February 18, 2025 Item 10
February 18, 2025
Mayor Terry Gaasterland
City of Del Mar
1050 Camino Del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
Re: Air Pollution Control Board Appointment
Dear Mayor Gaasterland,
The Sierra Club San Diego Chapter has long advocated for a comprehensive solution to the Tijuana River pollution crisis. We hired an organizer for the South Bay to specifically work on environmental justice issues, including the Tijuana River. We’ve supported measures put forth by our elected officials at the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, and the City Council’s of Imperial Beach, Coronado, Chula Vista, and National City. We agree that the Tijuana River pollution crisis needs decisive action and the SD-APCD will be a part of the solution. This issue is going to take federal action and we are confident that our San Diego delegation, along with partner organizations, will continue to advocate for a strong federal response to finally create a bi-national comprehensive solution.

Additionally, the SD-APCD has other important regulatory authority on issues like warehouse pollution, ozone depletion, air toxic hotspots, sensitive receptors, vehicle pollution, and so much more.

We are confident that Council Member Teresa Acosta, with her experience as an air quality champion, will be able to fight hard for a solution to the Tijuana River pollution crisis along with all of the air quality issues facing our County.

Given the current climate of the federal government, our region will likely lose out on more federal grants, and we need air quality champions who will vote to support regulatory measures to protect our communities, and fight for clean air.

Thank you for your consideration,
Lisa Ross Sally Prendergast
Sierra Club San Diego Sierra Club San Diego
Chapter Chair North County Coastal Group Chair
4241 Jutland Dr., Ste. 303, San Diego, CA. 92117 | TEL: 858-569-6005 | http://sandiego.sierraclub.org February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Serena Pelka <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 11:59 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item #10 - Appointment to the Air Pollution Control District Governing Board 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 - Please accept my comments for Item #10 below. Thank you! Mayor Gaasterland and Councilmembers,
My name is Serena Pelka and I am a Policy Advocate at Climate Action Campaign, where we work to create a clean air and pollution-free future where everyone can thrive.

The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) will continue to play an important role in achieving this future where everyone has access to clean air, a basic human need. We need to ensure San Diego residents have highly qualified leadership at APCD to address the urgent air quality issues our communities face across the region.

We kindly request that the Del Mar City Council support Carlsbad Councilmember Teresa Acosta as the County District 3 representative on APCD and give the directive to Mayor Gaasterland to support Teresa Acosta at the March 10 City Selection Committee Meeting.

Councilmember Acosta will bring the passion and experienced leadership that is needed on the Board, with over a decade of experience in air quality policy and advocacy. She has served over the last 5 years as an air quality consultant to governing board members in the South Coast Air Quality Management District. She is undoubtedly the most qualified person to serve on this Board and champion action for clean air.

As a District 3 resident, I support Councilmember Teresa Acosta. I also want to ensure that the decision for who will represent our district will be made by District 3 leaders. Thank you! Serena Pelka (she/her)
Policy Advocate
Climate Action Campaign
(619) 419-1222 ext. 715
To
help
prot
ect
you
r
priv
acy,
Mi…
Like what we do? Support Climate Action Campaign today.

Our mission is simple: create a zero carbon future through effective and equitable policy action
February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Vanessa Forsythe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:03 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Need Commitment from Del Mar Mayor to support Appointment of Carlsbad Council Member Teresa Acosta to San Diego Air Quality Control Board 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 Council Members and Mayor
It is necessary that the North Coastal Communities have representation on the San Diego Air Quality Control Board. The commitment of Del Mayor to support the appointment of Carlsbad Council Member Teresa Acosta to San Diego Air Quality Control Board. Ms. Acosta is by far the best candidate for this position based on years of experience serving on local and state organizations.

Respectfully submitted
Vanessa
Vanessa Forsythe RN MSN
2177 Vista La Nisa, Carlsbad, CA 92009
California Nurses for Environmental Health & Justice
CleanEarth4Kids
Climate Health Now
League of Women Voters North County San Diego
"Keep Marching...your ancestors are all the proof that you need that progress is possible not guaranteed...keep marching on...the future demands that we fight for it now" February 18, 2025 Item 10
1 Melinda Gould
From: Peter Zahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:30 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Comment on 2/18/25 Council Agenda, Item #10 - SD County Air Pollution Control District
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 Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers –
I’m a Solana Beach resident (in County District 3) and urge you to support Teresa Acosta for a seat on the SD County Air Pollution Control District Board.

Her experience and qualifications will make her a great representative for our region, in this very important position.

Best regards,
Peter Zahn
_____________________________
Peter Zahn
858-232-6649
February 18, 2025 Item 10