Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda
Del Mar Town Hall
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
August 18, 2025 City Council Meeting
INFORMATION RECEIVED
AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA
WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Udo Wahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2025 8:16 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: City Council meeting 8-18-25 Item #4 Traffic Red Dot 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.
MAYHEM ON STRATFORD COURT
August 18, 2025- Del Mar City Council Item #4
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
My name is Udo Wahn.
I have been a resident of Del Mar for 42 years and have resided at Stratford Court between 12th and 13th Streets for 40 years.
Three years ago, I wrote to the City about our family’s concerns regarding traffic on our street.
The reply was, “We will look into it.” Nothing has happened since then.
And now things have only gotten worse over the years. These problems are as follows:
1. 2.
3. Stratford Court has become a thoroughfare for traffic, even though it is a RESIDENTIAL
4. street. Instead of staying on Camino Del Mar (CDM), people cut through town on our street, making our residential street akin to a highway. This is unacceptable.
5. At one time, there was a discussion to extend the center median on 12th Street that runs West and East beyond the current lefthand turn possibility at Stratford Court. An extension would require drivers to have to go up onto CDM. That would negate any incentive to use Stratford court as a shortcut.
2. August 18, 2025 Item 4
2 3.
4. It is nearly impossible for us to back out of our own driveway. This is due to the constant
5. traffic, chaos on the street, and inconsiderate drivers who still park in the small red zones painted on the sides of our driveway. Thank you Community Service Officers for keeping an eye on this. We have been taken to move our car from our home early in the
6. morning to park somewhere else where we can more easily and safely depart.
7. 3.
4. 5. Our narrow residential street is without sidewalks. Cars and large trucks parked on
6. both
7. sides of the street, with pedestrians, dogs, cyclists, delivery trucks and bluff stabilization heavy equipment battling to safely pass through the street has caused an escalation in road rage and damaged cars. We have been victims of both. Drivers coming from
8. opposing directions get stuck and are unable to pass. We hear the profanities yelled between drivers in these hostile standoffs. I have had drivers yell profanities at me when I am only trying to get to my
9. own
10. house!
11. 4.
5. 6. We have one of the 2 driveways on the street. Ours is being used by a steady stream of
7. drivers trying to suddenly turn around when an elusive parking spot on the opposite side of the street opens up. Imagine what that does to the traffic flow. These people are often in a hurry, running over and breaking our footlights, destroying our landscaping
8. and on occasion backing into a parked car.
9. 5.
6. 7. We are besieged by constant construction. The Bluff project will continue for years.
8. The old Bully’s Restaurant construction continues and we have at least 6 construction projects ongoing within 2 blocks of our home. This brings many workers and trucks to our neighborhood as early as 6:30 a.m.
9. August 18, 2025 Item 4
3 Please consider no parking on the West side of our street, Memorial Day to Labor Day at a minimum. Please note that the section of Stratford Court north of us between 13th and 15th Streets has the whole West side of Stratford Court marked as no parking. Why is that? These neighborhood streets should be treated equally.
The bottom line here is that Stratford Court is a residential street and it should not be allowed to continue as a thoroughfare to bypass traffic on CDM and 1-5.
Thank You!
Udo Wahn
1227 Stratford Court
Del Mar, CA
August 18, 2025 Item 4
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Udo Wahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2025 2:49 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot item#4 supplement my letter
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Please include this perfect example of a violation.
Photo taken today August 17th, 2025 at 245pm.
Access to our home driveway blocked.
August 18, 2025 Item 4
August 18, 2025 Item 4
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Janet Wilson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2025 3:31 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Cc: Dan Quirk; Tracy Martinez; John Spelich; Terry Gaasterland; Janet Wilson Subject: RED DOT City Council Meeting Item 4 - MBI Task Order for Curbside Management Inventory
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 Councilmembers,
Regarding Curbside Management Inventory - The primary focus of this effort is to document all colored curbs and assess on-street public parking throughout the City, with an emphasis on emergency vehicle access, parking enforcement, and reporting requirements related to parking. Beyond parking, many sightline laws, ordinances, and policies could also benefit from this study to improve public safety.
The digital and video data collected during the driving tour will be a valuable asset, and the comprehensive survey of every street in Del Mar presents an opportunity to gather additional information. What other relevant data could be captured during this effort? Unmarked red curbs —
California AB413, also referred to as the Daylighting Law, went into effect on January 1st. The law prohibits vehicle parking within 20 feet of any marked or unmarked corner (or 15 feet where a curb extension is present) to improve the range of vision of approaching drivers. Violators will be ticketed, even if no signage or red curb is marking the restriction! https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB413
Many corners are not currently painted red, so marking them would improve visibility and enhance public safety.
Could the survey identify unmarked corners for a future project?
Sightlines —
DMMC 30.86.150 Street Corner Sight Distance states no structure, plant material, or other object shall be erected, placed, planted, or allowed to grow within 20 feet of the intersection of arterial streets or arterial-collector streets, as measured from the center of the nearest curb return or, where there is no curb, from the edge of pavement, in such a manner as to materially obstruct or impede vision from passing automobiles.
https://library.municode.com/ca/del_mar/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT30ZO_CH30.86SURE_30.86.150STCOS IDI
August 18, 2025 Item 4
2 Could the survey create an inventory of problematic sightlines for review?
Blind spots —
Del Mar is known for its rustic streets, many of which lack curbs and sidewalks and wind through hilly terrain. Dense vegetation combined with these conditions often creates blind spots and corners that put pedestrians and cyclists at risk.
If identified, these areas could be reviewed for potential improvements, such as signage or speed bumps.
Note: blind curves should be incorporated into 30.86.150 Street Corner Sight Distance.
Driveways —
Over time, vegetation has grown, and many driveways now have obstructed sightlines, resulting in blind spots.
30.92.040(B)(5)(e) … Any vegetation proposed to be planted adjacent to a driveway shall be selected and located so as to maintain adequate sight lines to and from the property, and along the property frontage to the public street(s) and intersection(s). https://library.municode.com/ca/del_mar/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT30ZO_CH30.92HOELIMOVZO_30.92.0 40DEST
23.08.074(G) The proposed development provides inadequate sight distances for motorists and pedestrians entering or exiting the property.
https://library.municode.com/ca/del_mar/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT23BUCO_CH23.08DERE_23.08.074RE
CORAPAPECI
https://www.delmar.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/3318/City-Council-Adopted-Design-Guidelines-PDF?bidId
And Del Mar’s Objective Design Standards Manual states, “Vegetation planted within 3 feet of a driveway and driveway apron shall be a maximum of 30 inches high at maturity as shown in Figure B-14.”
Could the driving tour survey identify driveways that are out of compliance? This information could create courtesy notices that could be sent to homeowners.
Public right-of-way encroachments —
City Council Policy 110 addresses private encroachments into city rights-of-way, stating August 18, 2025 Item 4
3 “There are numerous circumstances in Del Mar where an improved (paved) section of a City right-of-way is narrower than the width of the right-of-way itself. This results in an area of unimproved right-of-way adjacent to private property. In many cases, the owner of the adjacent property, or designee, proposes to install landscaping and other landscaperelated improvements in the unimproved portion of the right-of-way. This has the beneficial effect of beautifying the area adjacent to the paved roadway, without the City having to bear the costs for installing or maintaining the improvements. These are generally considered to be an appropriate use of a right-of-way but still subject to review under the Encroachment Permit process.”
Del Mar actions are complaint-driven; therefore, the majority of these types of encroachments have never been reviewed, but if they were, many of them would be identified as a safety hazard in violation of:
1.b) Creating an unsafe line of sight for pedestrians or motorists.
1.c) Interfering with or not accommodating safe pedestrian passage (retention/provision of a continuous, minimum five-foot-wide “safe harbor” along the edge of the paved roadway is the standard applied by the City)
https://www.delmar.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/3828/City-Council-Policy-Book-?bidId=
The Curbside Management Inventory offers a way to systematically record these conditions, enabling future planning efforts to prioritize pedestrian safety along with parking and access requirements more effectively.
City trees —
As part of the update to Chapter 23.51 (Trees, Scenic Views, and Sunlight), adjacent homeowners may become responsible for maintaining City trees in the public right-of-way. While many homeowners already do so, some don’t, for example, when a property line fence separates the right-of-way trees from the properties (Jimmy Durante was given as an example during the last City Council meeting).
Could these situations be documented to identify how many homes may fall into this category?
Additional questions —
Will streets without gutters and curbs be identified differently from streets with curbs? Many protected trees are located along streets. Could these trees be automatically identified and cataloged?
Are Clean Air Vehicle spaces being inventoried?
The key point is this: the driving tour provides a valuable opportunity to document existing conditions and ensure that upcoming changes address the full range of current challenges. Aligning this work with related requirements could strengthen both public safety and long-term planning.
Janet Wilson
619.733.1428
August 18, 2025 Item 4
Dear Mayor Gasterlaand and City Council Members,
As a former Chair of the Shores Park Committee, I’m writing with regard to Item 5 on the August 18 Agenda “Dissolution of the Shores Park Master Plan Advisory Committee.” While I do not necessarily oppose the dissolution of our long moribund Committee, I believe that rather than create a subcommittee of the Parks and Recreations Committee to take over that role, the City Council should re-form a new Shores Park Master Plan Advisory Committee whose goal is to oversee the planning and completion of the Park as originally intended. There are several reasons for this opinion.
1) The Shores Park was one of the three named beneficiaries of the Measure Q sales tax increase that was voted by the citizens of Del Mar.
While Streetscape was rapidly completed, it now seems that Undergrounding has been proposed to take up all revenues from measure Q for the foreseeable future, leaving Shores Park completion to unsecured funding. If the completion of the Park becomes dependent on only Citizen donations, rather than a continuing discussion of a dedicated Advisory committee, I believe that the priorities for progress will not reflect the will of the community as a whole.
2) I believe the current proposed plan is a breach of the intent of Measure Q, and the reason that many of us voted for it. It now appears that Shores Park is simply an afterthought. I believe that a real and concerted effort will need to be revived as a committed and present goal with much attention and care. Constituting a full-fledged Advisory Committee, with interviews and votes from the City Council would reflect the seriousness and intent of the effort.
3) The City Staff has little institutional memory of what took place and the discussions and citizen input that ultimately brought the conceptual plans into existence. Additionally, I believe that a sub-committee of the members of the Parks and Recreation Committee, who did not explicitly volunteer for this significant task will not represent the focus, care, work and intent of the original Committee and its goals as reflected in the multiple citizen events that went into the planning of the park.
A rapid completion of the Shores Park will benefit all of us in the near future, rather than the Undergounding of the entire City, which will take several decades, if ever. Please give it the thought and intent it deserves.
Sincerely,
Arthur Olson
Avenida Primavera
August 18, 2025 Item 5