2026-08-26 Special Meeting Item #01 Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement - Public Comment 2

Road Safety
Thank you City of Encinitas, Staff,
Mobility & Traffic Commission
and Council
for all you have done in the last 2 years
to improve road safety for all modes of
mobility
And I do believe you are willing to
continue with these efforts and more
Some in our community are saying
efforts have not been made to ensure safety. And are advocating a complete adaptation of the Vision Zero program, citing success with this program in Hoboken, New Jersey: 9 years with no road fatalities.

Hoboken, New Jersey
Population 60,000 in 1.2 square miles
Encinitas
Population 60,000 in 20 Square miles

According to Brave AI:
75 percent of residents in Hoboken, New Jersey do not own a car. attributed to the city's high walkability, public transit options and parking difficulties.

And: 80 percent of commuters travel to work without a personal vehicle.

But is Vision Zero full proof of zero
fatalities for 2 consecutive years or more in all cities it is implamented in? According to ChatGBT –cities with 2
consecutive years of Zero Fatalities:• Jersey City: one zero year • Alexandria: one zero year • Alameda: one zero year • San Francisco: no • San José: no • Fremont: no • Los Angeles: no • New York City: no Thank you City of Encinitas
for all you have done
and will continue to do
for improving road safety for all in
Encinitas
From: BOB AYERS
To: City Clerk
Subject: Written comment Aug 26 2024 4pm "special" meeting roadway safety and enforcement Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 11:19:31 AM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

The data from experts clearly shows that resources and attention need to go where the fatalities occur: El Camino Real, Highway 101, Encinitas Blvd. and freeway on/offramps. The data also show that 4 members of this City Council do not apply data and do not listen to experts. There is no need for a “special” meeting when little that is new or special is before you. This meeting looks more like a campaign event where we are sure to hear more blame, bluster and empty promises.

Bob Ayers
Attorney
[email protected]
(760) 753-9086
From: Peter Stern
To: council
Subject: Special traffic meeting thoughts
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 11:34:21 AM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Dear Council,
Thank you in advance for considering my thoughts regarding the state of our City's traffic.

Encinitas again finds itself at a terrible crossroads: to calm development or to calm traffic. The two go hand in hand and are fundamentally incompatible.

This problem has been raised by myself and others during the last thirty plus years declaring with certainty that community character would be deteriorated by the addition of housing and its attendant traffic. The result has been an increase in fatalities, traffic and congestion. In short, community character has been woefully degraded. The advent of electric motorized bicycles has also contributed to the problem.

Solutions: if the Council has the true courage to declare enough is enough regarding traffic and the consequences therefrom, it must declare a moratorium on all housing development including the insidious infill of ADUs (which do nothing for family housing only income for the primary residents). The through line is very clear: more dwelling units cause more cars, more cars congest more roads requiring two to three light sequences to get to places, more light sequences waited cause more driver frustration, more driver frustration causes more yellow and red light running, more light running causes more pedestrian incidents etc. This unvirtuous cycle will not stop unless you stop it! Human nature is not going to be changed by ordinance. If you do not believe our roads are becoming to congested you are living under a rock. Certain areas are now no go zones during the day ie: Rt. 101, Leucadia Blvd, Encinitas Blvd. etc. What used to take 12 minutes to go across town can now take 25 minutes and it is getting worse (not better). The scheduled additional housing will only make our bad situation worse. Be real and be honest with yourself and your constituents. A moratorium on all dwelling units is the only, best and immediate response to this worsening situation.

Regarding E bikes: there is an age and licence requirement for motorcycles. An ebike is a motorized bicycle. I have no doubt that they are a ton of fun, especially for children. I have spoken to many children about riding their e bikes on the sidewalk (where they do not belong) instead of in the bike lanes of Santa Fe Drive. The answer the children give me is 100% consistent: that they are too afraid to ride the ebike in the bike lane. If there is fear in the equation, it begs the question: why are these youngsters on these ebikes at all? Again, show some courage to do the right thing and ban e bikes in the City of Encinitas for persons younger than 16. All applicable State laws regarding motorcycles should then be applied to riders of motorized bikes in the City of Encinitas. Unpopular with the cycle shops too bad- we are trying to preclude tragedies!
We are at a "do the right thing" moment. Half measures will not work. The day myself and others have been screaming about has finally arrived in its worst manifestation: deaths. If you were to do nothing at all, would the traffic and dangerous situation get better? Of course not! The time has come for bold determinations. Hopefully, each of you has realized that you/we cannot have it all:
housing development and our lovely safe suburban beach town. Choose wisely and DO THE RIGHT THING.

Thank you for considering my thoughts on this matter,
Cordially, Peter Stern Cardiff
From: Theresa Beauchamp
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Written Comment for Special Meeting August 26, 2026 Street Safety agenda item Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 2:08:36 PM
Attachments: image.png
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Records of collisions in the City of Encinitas repeatedly show that the most dangerous streets that require more cyclist and pedestrian protections include:

Coast Highway 101 & El Portal - Dr. Jennings Worley hit by working van while cycling Encinitas Boulevard and Village Square Drive - 12 year old Emery Chelakian walking on crosswalk hit and killed by sedan
Coast Highway 101 & Chesterfield Dr - Ryan William Currie El Camino Real - 14 year old Brodie Champlain-Kingman
We expect council to make policy decisions regarding active transit infrastructure to be prioritized based on where the most collisions and fatalities occur.

Theresa Beauchamp
District 2
From: Sierra Tzoore
To: City Clerk
Subject: Special Meeting Item #01 Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement - Public Comment Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 2:17:42 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Dear council members,
I am a five-year Village Park resident and am writing to share comments on the roadway safety agenda.

Shortly after moving to Village Park, I wrote my first-ever letter to a city council, expressing concern about the unsafe driving I routinely see in Encinitas, including running of stop signs and red lights and speeding. I described it as an accident waiting to happen. In 2024, an accident did happen and the person killed was my 11-year-old's best friend. Since then, there has been another child pedestrian fatality in Encinitas.

Although I see and appreciate the efforts this council has made on this issue, many of the factors that make tragedies like this more likely are still evident. I implore you to prioritize this issue and do more, including:
* Reinstating red light cameras at problem intersections * Increasing traffic enforcement, adding new deputies if necessary * Investing in evidence-based roadway upgrades that improve safety for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians
I share many of the council members' goal to preserve the beach town feel that makes Encinitas such a nice place to live and raise a family. To me, that goal is inseparable from doing everything possible to discourage dangerous driving (and encourage safe driving) in our town.

Thank you for your time,
Sierra Tzoore
Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]>
Fwd: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form [COLMIGNOLI - 1331 Lake Drive] Bryant Jemison <[email protected]> Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 9:28 PM To: "Robert E. Gibson" <[email protected]>
Cc: code <[email protected]>, Brian Dunn <[email protected]>, Jaylee McDowell <[email protected]>, Shaun Berning <[email protected]>, Mike Tisdale <[email protected]>, Mike Tisdale <[email protected]>
Mr. Gibson,
Thank you for following up regarding this matter.

Upon discussion with the City’s Engineering Department, it was determined all grades were verified via an Engineering Certification from the Engineer of Record. Additionally, at time of final, the wall was determined to be 6-ft. in height, when measured from the adjacent grades on both sides of the wall. Finally, the wall is not classified as a retaining wall, rather a standard privacy wall. As a result, the Grading Permit (#LDEV-013107-2020) and Building Permits (#BLDR-012089-2020, #BLDR-012104-2020, & #BLDR-012105-2020) were finaled.

However, an inspection has determined that the front yard wall appears to be located within the 30-ft. front yard setback.

As such, the wall is subject to a maximum height of 4-ft. solid, OR up to 6-ft. provided the upper 2-ft. are at least 50% open. The city is working with the responsible party to resolve this matter.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Bryant Jemison, CCEO
Code Enforcement Manager
Development Services
Office: 760-633-2688
[email protected]
Correspondents should be aware that all communications to and from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties. Conduct business with the City of Encinitas online from the convenience of your office, home, or mobile device! Please tell us how we are doing.

From: Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2025 5:16 PM
To: Bryant Jemison <[email protected]>
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 172 of 239
Cc: code <[email protected]>; Brian Dunn <[email protected]> Subject: Re: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form [COLMIGNOLI - 1331 Lake Drive] CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Mr. Jemison:

As you're aware, the owners of 1331 Lake Drive have already admitted that they overgraded the property in their Response to the Public Comment (attached and marked as Exhibit 1 - see highlighted sections on pages 2 and 3). This overgrading resulted in a huge grade difference of 2.5 feet involving moving 150 cubic yards of earth (the equivalent of 15-20 large dump trucks).

To determine the actual amount of overgrading, Mr. Dunn engaged a geotechnical engineer to perform a topographical survey comparing the historical topography of the site, the proposed topography from the site plans, and the actual topography after construction.

Attached is this topographical survey. As you can see on Page 3, there is significant overgrading across the entire lot, but in particular under almost the entire house structure, the pool area, and underneath the front wall. This confirms the admission by the owners of 1331 Lake Drive.

This was an intentional act in direct violation of the issued grading permit. And due to the egregiousness of this act, if the City considers some type of retroactive permit this will only encourage others to beg forgiveness rather than ask for permission.

We encourage the City to hold the owners of 1331 Lake Drive to the original building permit and require them to restore the property to its permitted grade.

If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss this matter further, please give me a call. Thank you.

Robert E. Gibson
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT E. GIBSON
9891 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
949.354.2361 Office
CONFIDENTIAL EMAIL: This email may contain Attorney-Client Privilege information and Attorney Work Product. This email is only for use by the intended recipient. If received in error any use, disclosure or copying is prohibited. Any inadvertent receipt shall not be a waiver of any privilege or work product protection. If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy any and all copies. Thank you.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 1:18 PM Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you. And we should hopefully have some data for you from our geotechnical engineer in the next week.

Robert E. Gibson
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT E. GIBSON
9891 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 173 of 239
Irvine, CA 92618
949.354.2361 Office
CONFIDENTIAL EMAIL: This email may contain Attorney-Client Privilege information and Attorney Work Product. This email is only for use by the intended recipient. If received in error any use, disclosure or copying is prohibited. Any inadvertent receipt shall not be a waiver of any privilege or work product protection. If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy any and all copies. Thank you.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 1:16 PM Bryant Jemison <[email protected]> wrote:

Robert,
Thank you for your patience, and I apologize for the delayed response.

This Code Case was previously assigned to Genaro Garcia, who is no longer with the City’s Code Enforcement Division. I will now be overseeing this matter moving forward. I am currently coordinating with the City’s Engineering and Planning Departments to prepare a response.

I appreciate your continued patience. Please don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any questions.

From: Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 7:06 PM
To: code <[email protected]>
Cc: Brian Dunn <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form [COLMIGNOLI - 1331 Lake Drive] CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 174 of 239
Dear Sir or Madam:

This office represents Brian Dunn, the owner of 1322 Lake Drive.

A Code Enforcement Complaint was submitted on June 4, 2025 concerning unauthorized grading at 1331 Lake Drive. Despite this Complaint being submitted more than 4 months ago, we have not heard anything concerning the status of this complaint.

Can you please provide an update regarding the status of the investigation? Also, Mr. Dunn has engaged a geotechnical engineer who is compiling a topography of the area including the conditions both before and after the construction at 1331 Lake Drive to illustrate the extent of the unauthorized grading and we wanted to make sure that this was included in the investigation. Please let us know the timeframe for the completion of the investigation so we can make sure to get this topography to you with enough time for it to be considered.

Thank you and we look forward to hearing from you.

On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 12:50 PM Grant Yamamoto <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Robert,
Thanks for your email, I recommend contacting the code enforcement department directly at [email protected].

Thank you,
Grant Yamamoto
Contract Assistant Planner
Development Services Department
505 South Vulcan Ave, Encinitas, CA 92024
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 175 of 239
760.633.2785 | [email protected]
www.encinitasca.gov
Correspondents should be aware that all communications to and from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties.

Conduct business with the City of Encinitas online from the convenience of your office, home, or mobile device!
Please tell us how we are doing.

From: Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 3, 2025 10:58 AM
To: Grant Yamamoto <[email protected]>
Cc: Brian Dunn <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form [COLMIGNOLI - 1331 Lake Drive] CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Grant:

Can I get the contact info for the assigned investigator for this complaint? We haven't heard anything regarding the complaint and we are working on some additional topographical data that will assist the investigation that we would like to get to the investigator.

Thanks.

This email is only for use by the intended recipient. If received in error any use, disclosure or copying is prohibited.

On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 5:24 PM Grant Yamamoto <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Robert,
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 176 of 239
Thanks for the notification. I will reach out if we need anything else from you.

Thank you,
Grant Yamamoto
Contract Assistant Planner
Development Services Department
505 South Vulcan Ave, Encinitas, CA 92024
760.633.2785 | [email protected]
www.encinitasca.gov
Correspondents should be aware that all communications to and from this address are subject to public disclosure and may be reviewed by third parties.

Conduct business with the City of Encinitas online from the convenience of your office, home, or mobile device!
Please tell us how we are doing.

From: Robert E. Gibson <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 4, 2025 5:17 PM
To: Grant Yamamoto <[email protected]>
Cc: Brian Dunn <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form [COLMIGNOLI - 1331 Lake Drive] CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Mr. Yamamoto:

Mr. Brian Dunn has submitted a citizen complaint form regarding the violations at 1331 Lake Drive (see below). If you or the assigned investigator need any additional information please don't hesitate to contact me.

Thank you.

Robert E. Gibson
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT E. GIBSON
9891 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 177 of 239
949.354.2361 Office
949.354.0643 Fax
CONFIDENTIAL EMAIL: This email may contain Attorney-Client Privilege information and Attorney Work Product.

This email is only for use by the intended recipient. If received in error any use, disclosure or copying is prohibited.

Any inadvertent receipt shall not be a waiver of any privilege or work product protection. If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy any and all copies. Thank you. ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: City of Encinitas <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 5:14 PM
Subject: *NEW SUBMISSION* Citizen Complaint Form
To: <[email protected]>
Citizen Complaint Form
Submission #: 4096999
IP Address: 98.164.208.114
Submission Date: 06/04/2025 5:13 PM
Survey Time: 2 minutes, 5 seconds
You have a new online form submission.

Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and can be viewed after you login.

Read-Only Content
Location Address (location of violation)
1331 Lake Drive
Encinitas,CA 92024
Property Owner Name

CLAUDIO COLMIGNOLI
If the property owner is unknown, please type 'Unknown'.

Property Owner Address (if different from location of violation) ,
Property Owner Email
[email protected]
Property Owner Phone
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 178 of 239
(804) 370-3543
Tenant Name
Not Applicable
If the tenant contact is unknown, please type 'Unknown'.

Tenant Email
Tenant Phone
Complainant Name
Brian Dunn
Complainant Address
1322 Lake Drive
Encinitas,CA 92024
Complainant Email
[email protected]
Complainant Phone
(949) 354-2361
Violation Description
See attached correspondence and exhibits for details concerning the violations. Generally speaking, 1331 Lake Drive has had unauthorized grading performed, has an unauthorized block wall which is over 6 feet in height, and a privacy wall which is acting as an unpermitted retaining wall. Details concerning these violations are included in the attached correspondence and exhibits. If you have any questions or if you need any additional information, please contact the attorney for Brian Dunn, Robert E. Gibson of LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT E. GIBSON, 9891 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92618, (949) 354-2361, [email protected].

File Upload (upload any supporting documentation)
20250603 DSDEncinitas - Code Enforcement - FINAL.pdf
Exhibit 1 - DSDEncinitas001 - Response from 1331 Lake.pdf Exhibit 2 - 202505200838 Colmignoli SB9 Lot Split and Single Family Residence.pdf Exhibit 3 - Planning Application and Forms A S L D.pdf
Read-Only Content
Terms and Conditions
I agree
Read-Only Content
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 179 of 239
Thank you,
City of Encinitas
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. 2 attachments
Exhibit 1 - DSDEncinitas001 - Response from 1331 Lake.pdf 218K
1331 Lake Drive - Draft - Nov 19 2025 - for Encinitas Code Enforcement.pdf 8884K
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 180 of 239
IN SITU ³ ´ x Disturbed Area: 0.80 acres 14767-G LDEV-013107-2020 ´ ³
´ 14767-G LDEV-013107-2020
x
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 14767-G LDEV-013107-2020
City of Encinitas
505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633
Tel: (760) 633-2710; Fax: (760) 633-2818
April 23, 2025
Robert E. Gibson
[email protected]
Brian Dunn
[email protected]
Subject: Public Comment regarding MULTI-006467-2023
Location: 1331 Lake Drive; APN: 260-213-18
Dear Robert Gibson and Brian Dunn
This letter is in response to the Public Comment Letter received February 24, 2025 which addresses issues regarding grading, unpermitted walls, and drainage. We have received a response from the applicant and PLSA Engineering. The planning and engineering department have reviewed the response and have approved the responses.

Response from applicant

1. Historic Drainage Patterns
a. Our firm did not obtain hand shot topographical information for the entirety of Lake Drive. However, public topographical data indicates that runoff is conveyed south to Woodlake Drive, where it then flows west via curb and gutter within Woodlake Drive. And while we are sympathetic to the drainage concerns raised by Mr. Dunn, as discussed in more detail below, our proposed project does not increase runoff entering Lake Drive. Moreover, our client is not obligated to remedy an existing drainage issue.
b. The proposed project at 1331 Lake Drive adheres to the standard engineering practice, the County Hydrology Design Manual, and the City of Encinitas municipal code, including the Engineering Design Manual, which mandates mitigation of any increase in the 100-year storm flow rate (Q100) through on-site detention. This project fully complies with the applicable codes and results in a net decrease in the rate of runoff leaving the project site compared to pre-project conditions, thereby not exacerbating stormwater conditions along Lake Drive.

Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 74 of 239
c. Exhibit A: Topography along Lake Drive
i. Source: SANGIS 2014 contours, Carlsbad basin.

2. Unpermitted Grading
a. The site was issued a grading permit in 2020 under permit 2020-14767-G, authorizing grading activities on-site. A comparison of the existing conditions against the 2020-14767-G approved grading plan revealed that a minor grading discrepancy occurred within the front yard setback.
b. Approximately 150 cubic yards (CY) of earth movement, resulting in a maximum grade difference of 2.5 feet of fill, were not explicitly included in the original permit scope. This additional grading has been incorporated into the preliminary grading plan currently under review.

3. Rear Wall
a. The rear wall on the project site was reviewed and approved under the previously issued grading permit 2020-14767-G. The permitted plans document the wall’s location, height, and structural specifications as meeting all applicable municipal code requirements. No additional unpermitted construction or modifications to the rear wall have occurred beyond what was approved in the permit.

Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 75 of 239

4. Privacy Wall
a. The privacy wall in question is a typically constructed wall built with 8" CMU blocks and standard 3'x1' foundations, which naturally require a degree of earth compaction as per standard construction details. Our review confirms that the compaction was performed in accordance with typical engineering practices, with no additional fill material introduced beyond what is standard for such a structure. b. Regarding the wall height, our Preliminary Grading Plan documents the existing conditions in comparison to the historic grade (pre-2020 work). Any sections of the wall found to exceed the 6-foot height limit as per the Encinitas Municipal Code (E.M.C.) will be demolished and brought into compliance. c. We are committed to ensuring full adherence to city regulations and will address any necessary modifications accordingly.

Response from Planning

1. Parking Issues
a. The property is proposing a 2-car garage on site and a driveway for additional parking. There are no guest parking requirements and this project is not subject to ADU parking requirements due to the subject property’s proximity to a public transit stop.

2. Emergency Vehicles
a. Our Fire Safety department has reviewed the project fully and has approved the project for emergency vehicle response and access. Fire access will also be reviewed again during grading and building permit phases.

3. Building Heights
a. The proposed buildings are 1-story with a maximum height is 11 feet 7 inches. The maximum height limit for this zone is 22 feet for flat roofs. The project meets all height requirements. The building has been measured from the lowest measurement of existing or finished grade. The existing grade prior to the 2020 approved grading plan has been called out on the plans.

4. Noise
a. Noise for construction will need to meet all noise conditions found in Encinitas Municipal Code Chapter 30.40.010. These conditions will be sent to the applicant during permit issuance.

5. Privacy
a. There are no privacy view regulations for this project. SB-9 regulations have updated on January 1, 2025 and no longer have privacy related restrictions.

Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 76 of 239

6. Public Hearing
a. Due to SB-9 being a ministerial review process, the bill exempts a local agency from being required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for housing developments and urban lot splits i. See our SB-9 webpage for more information on SB-9 requirements.

1. https://www.encinitasca.gov/government/departments/developme nt-services/policy-planning-housing/policy-planning/sb-9- implementation
If you have any questions regarding this letter or any other aspects of your project or the process, please contact me at (760) 633-2785 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Grant Yamamoto
Grant Yamamoto
Contract Assistant Planner
City of Encinitas
Document Ref: AFARP-WXDSU-IRHUX-Y7GP6 Page 77 of 239
Code Enforcement Concerning 1331 Lake Drive
August 26, 2026 Encinitas City Council Meeting
My name is Brian Dunn and I am a homeowner in the City.

I feel compelled to bring to the attention of the City Council a significant oversight on the part of the Code Enforcement Department of the City of Encinitas concerning the lack of enforcement of the building codes of the City and the State. And I am requesting a hearing on this matter at the next available opportunity.

In 2020, the Encinitas Building Department issued a grading permit to the property located at 1331 Lake Drive, for grading operations to be performed. These grading operations were to be performed under Permit # LDEV-013107-2020, Drawing # 2020-14767-G.

In performing these grading operations at 1331 Lake Drive, there was a significant breach of the grading permit, which involved the owner of 1331 Lake Drive trucking in 150 Cubic Yards of fill soil (about 15-20 full size dump trucks), effectively raising the entire property by about

2.5 feet. This was in direct violation of the grading permit, and was clearly intentional in nature.

The homeowner of 1331 Lake admitted to all of this to the City—that the property was overgraded by 2.5 feet to the City. The City is fully aware of this.

The homeowner sent a response to the City concerning the grading which stated that
“Approximately 150 cubic yards (CY) of earth
movement, resulting in a maximum grade
difference of 2.5 feet of fill, were not explicitly
included in the original permit scope.”
(See April 23, 2025 City of Encinitas letter, Page
2, Section 2(b) – highlighted section.)
I submitted a Citizen Complaint to Code Enforcement regarding this gross violation of the grading permit. I included the homeowner’s admission that the property was overgraded by 2.5 feet and that they trucked in 150 cubic yards of fill soil. And I submitted an independent topography that had been performed by my engineer to show the extent of the overgrading.

Code Enforcement completely ignored the evidence provided to them and claimed that the grading was performed correctly. They relied solely on an Engineering Certification that had been provided by the homeowner’s engineer. That Engineering Certification claimed that all grading was within 0.1 feet of the grading permit. Which the homeowner already admitted was wrong. Yet Code Enforcement was relying on it to say that the grading was performed correctly.

The City’s final approval of the grading at 1331 Lake Drive was based on this same erroneous Engineering Certification.

This unpermitted and unauthorized grading resulted in 1331 Lake Drive not only having their lot 2.5 higher than it should, this also resulted in them having a front wall in excess of 6-feet, which is higher than is allowed under City of Encinitas Code of Ordinances § 30.16.010. In addition to the added height due to the unpermitted and unauthorized grading, a berm was built up at the base of the front wall at 1331 Lake Drive in an attempt to disguise what is actually a wall that is actually approximately 10 feet high.

All of this was brought to the attention of Code Enforcement, but they just kept referring back to the homeowner’s engineering certification.

Completely ignoring that the engineering certification was wrong.

On January 6, 2026, Respondent City of Encinitas Code Enforcement stated in an email that:
“Upon discussion with the City’s Engineering
Department, it was determined all grades were
verified via an Engineering Certification from the
Engineer of Record. Additionally, at time of final,
the wall was determined to be 6-ft. in height,
when measured from the adjacent grades on both
sides of the wall. Finally, the wall is not classified
as a retaining wall, rather a standard privacy wall.

As a result, the Grading Permit (#LDEV-013107-
2020) and Building Permits (#BLDR-012089-
2020, #BLDR-012104-2020, & #BLDR-012105-
2020) were finaled.”
(See January 6, 2025 Encinitas Email String)
I have run into a wall (no pun intended) at every turn dealing with Code Enforcement on this. It is baffling that they are disregarding not only the admission of the owner of 1331 Lake of the grading permit violations, but also independent evidence showing that there were permit violations.

And these are not petty permit violations. This is a 1 acre lot that has been raised by 2.5 feet.

Unless Code Enforcement acts to enforce its own building codes, not only will Code Enforcement continue to put the safety of the public at large at risk by allowing unpermitted and unauthorized grading to continue in the community. But this will lead to other grading permit violations by other homeowners if they know that Code Enforcement does not enforce grading permits. The next person can violate a grading permit, and if Code Enforcement tries to stop them, that homeowner can point to 1331 Lake Drive and claim that Code Enforcement is selectively prosecuting them.

The safety of the community is at stake here. Please do not allow such egregious and intentional acts to occur within our City.

I request a hearing on this matter before the City Council at the next available opportunity. Thank you.

From: Diane Vislisel
To: City Clerk
Subject: Special City Council Meeting - Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 2:34:39 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

This is the first time you received an email from this sender ([email protected]). Exercise caution when clicking links, opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.

Secured by Avanan
Honorable Mayer Ehlers, and Members of the City Council:

We urge you to prioritize taking action today to make our streets safer for pedestrians. Too many in our community have been struck and killed, and you have the power to stop this from continuing.

We are here to remind you that in addition to the children whose lives were tragically ended abruptly, our friend Emily Hernandez-- a parent of three, and a pillar of our local community-- was struck and killed by a hit and run driver on Hwy 101 in Leucadia in January 2025. She was simply crossing the road to go to Nectarine Grove for dinner. Tragically, she did not make it across the road. There is no safe crossing! We urge you today to prioritize installing a lighted crosswalk to make it safe for ALL to access the popular restaurants along that dark and dangerous block.

Please take action today to make Encinitas streets safer for all pedestrians.

Thank you.

Respectfully,
Friends of Emily Hernandez
From: Torie Quinonez
To: City Clerk
Cc: Joy Lyndes
Subject: Special City Council Meeting - Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement - Item 1 Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 2:38:28 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

I am writing to urge the council to prioritize roadway safety and traffic enforcement – especially speed and red light enforcement – on the Santa Fe Drive corridor, where I live with my family. I would like to ask that Mackinnon Avenue also be prioritized, due to its usage by pedestrians and cyclists of all ages, but especially children who use the route to Ada Harris School. The excessive width of Mackinnon Avenue encourages speeding, and the existing bike lanes are frequently driven into by these speeding vehicles, presumably on their way to the Birmingham freeway entrance. I have repeatedly watched vehicles speed through the crosswalk at Ocean Crest Road, ignoring the flashing beacon lights and the person (often a child en route to school) waiting to cross.

We know that roadway design is the single most important factor in whether people drive safely or not. If the street is wide like a highway, people drive like they are on a highway, regardless of the posted speed limit. People are choosing to drive larger, heavier, deadlier vehicles at high speeds on surface streets. Please prioritize the lives of our children and other non-driving community members. Three children killed by drivers in as many years is three too many.

Thank you for your time.

A concerned Cardiff resident
From: Sheila Cameron
To: City Clerk
Subject: Roadway Safety and Traffic Meeting
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 2:45:33 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Driving in Encinitas
Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement CC Meeting
August 16, 2026
A few years ago, at a National Park three young people died after having been swept over a waterfall. Although plenty of signs were already posted nearby (don't go in the water, etc.), they went in anyway. When the ranger was interviewed by concerned citizens, his reply:
"One thing I've learned after over 30 years here in the Park is that you can't protect people from themselves."
We can believe and demand "The Other" fix things for us. "The Other" in this case being our City Government. However, maybe what we should be doing is standing in front of a mirror and asking ourselves some questions: Do we sometimes tend to drive too fast? Drive 10 – 20 miles or more over the speed limit? Have we pulled out from a Right-Hand turn when we see cars coming, but pull out anyway? Do we approach a yellow traffic light and instead of slowing to a stop – gun the gas and fly through it? Even when the light is Red?
This City government cannot protect us from ourselves!
We have been given an abundance of rules and physical installations to protect our health and safety and the safety of others when driving. What happens when we get into these 2,000 to 3,000 lb automobiles - our cocoons? While in our cars do we have a sense of entitlement only for ourselves? Why else do we roll through Stop signs or drive right through Red traffic lights?
Where and how did we learn to drive? Was something missing in our training? A moral compass perhaps? Do we pass on bad habits and indifference for safety and rules of the road to our children?
So now, there are children on motorbikes and e-bikes. A convenience for parents, another concern and fearful distraction for motorists. Children too young, too precious, and too uninformed.

Are the stats for accidents a Generational phenomenon?
I've been subjected to 3 accidents over the past 6 years none of them my fault: An 18 year old did a U turn right into my driver's car side – that scared me; second - a 26 year old driver pulled out of her parking space without looking and smashed into me; and a young man driving a business panel truck saw me coming on Highway 101 in Leucadia, pulled out from the right straight into me! His comment – "I saw you coming, but I thought I had more time."
So, is TIME the culprit? Are we in too much of a hurry, too stressed running late, and trying to do too much? If we THINK and slow down, can we save us from ourselves? It's a start.

Sheila S. Cameron
Former Mayor of Encinitas
From: Kori Smith
To: City Clerk
Subject: Special City council meeting - Roadway safety & traffic enforcement item1 Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 3:32:15 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Unfortunately I cannot be at the meeting in person today due to my work schedule. I am an Encinitas resident and am very concerned about our street safety. I am disappointed that the red light cameras are still not installed and still don't understand why they were removed in the first place. Driving around Encinitas I constantly see people running yellow lights, speeding up as soon as the light turns yellow and speeding. The red light cameras would hopefully deter people from running yellow and red lights.

We want to see change and make our streets safer. We hope our community leaders can finally hear what we are saying and take action.

KORI SMITH
From: Tom Frank
To: Bruce Ehlers; Jim OHara; Marco San Antonio; Luke Shaffer; Joy Lyndes; City Clerk Cc: Jennifer Campbell; [email protected]; Tom Frank; Christina Frank; Dan & Susie Murray; Leah Austin; Jeannie Lowe; Tom Sortwell; Sandra Watson; Mike Dobransky; Sadie Weinberg; Leigh Ratcliffe; Scott Drapkin Subject: August 26, 2026 | Special City Council Meeting, 4:00 PM Agenda Item 1. Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 3:43:30 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY– ROAD SAFETY & ALCOHOL OVER-SATURATION Thank you, Mayor Ehlers and Council Members for prioritizing road safety and community character—issues directly interconnected.

THE CORE PROBLEM:

Three factors drive serious injuries and fatalities: DUI, distracted driving, and speeding. This Council cannot effectively address DUI without confronting alcohol over-saturation in our commercial zones.

THE EVIDENCE:

Leucadia Boulevard (Census Tract 177.01) has 19 active licenses against a cap of 7— 271% over the legal limit
National and local studies consistently show: alcohol over-saturation → increased DUI → increased traffic fatalities
A recent collision on Leucadia Boulevard (August 23, 2026, 10:59 PM) demonstrates the daily risk
THE QUESTION FOR STAFF:

Since the 2016 alcohol saturation report to the planning commission, has this issue improved or worsened? What is the true cost to public safety—including lives lost—versus revenue gained?
THE REQUEST:

Approve a resolution establishing a City Council policy to NOT approve any increases in alcohol service, seating areas, or distribution within our City, until such time as the City Council reviews and accepts a study showing the Alcohol Outlet Saturation Levels in Encinitas are at a desirable level as determined solely by the City Council.

DETAILED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Background & Context
The City Council's recent discussion of the Business Commission Workplan appropriately emphasized that Encinitas must attract businesses that "fit within the ethos of the community." As Mayor Ehlers noted, this is not about maximizing business revenue at the expense of community character. “It's about the right mix of businesses mix to support the community. But that does not mean getting a mix that focuses maximizing business revenue dollars because that will have us go down a path of pacific beach. That is how Pacific Beach became the town that it is today.”I completely agree with the Mayor’s sentiments on this subject.

Road safety improvements underway—including street resurfacing, updated striping standards, and the L101 streetscape project with effective yield-control intersections—are commendable. However, these infrastructure improvements alone cannot address the root causes of traffic fatalities when one of those primary causes (DUI) is directly enabled by alcohol over-saturation in our community.

The Three Leading Causes of Traffic Injuries and Fatalities As documented in both national and local studies, the top three leading causes of serious injuries and fatalities on our roads are:

1. Driving Under the Influence (DUI)

2. Distracted Driving

3. Speeding
ISSUE 1: DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI)
The August 23, 2026 Incident
A video posted on social media on August 23, 2026 at 10:59 PM documents a single-vehicle collision on Leucadia Boulevard. The video shows a person working on the road who runs toward the collision to render aid. This incident exemplifies the frequency and danger of impaired driving on Leucadia Boulevard and other roadways in Encinitas.

Video Reference: https://www.instagram.com/reels/DcbU2EXi2bM/ Credit: @roundaboutrookies on Instagram
Key Observation: The roundabout on Santa Fe Drive, Leucadia Blvd., and N. Coast Highway 101 effectively protects innocent bystanders by limiting the severity of collisions caused by impaired drivers. Proposed yield-control intersections on N. Coast Highway 101 north of Leucadia Boulevard will provide similar protective benefits.

Alcohol Over-Saturation: The Documentation
Census Tract 177.01 (Leucadia Area) – Current Status
Active On-Sale Licenses: 19
Allowable Cap: 7
Over-Concentration Rate: 271%
Leucadia. is heavily "over-concentrated" under California guidelines, with nearly triple its state-allotted limit.

Legal and Regulatory Implications
This high density of alcohol licenses triggers several legal and regulatory considerations:

The Legal Hurdle – Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN): Because the tract is over- concentrated, the California Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) cannot automatically issue new or expanded retail alcohol licenses with special conditions for limitations eliminate.

The Burden of Proof: Any new business applying for an increase in achohol service area or distribution must successfully complete the Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) process.

Local Government Control: The applicant must convince the Encinitas City Council or local law enforcement that the business provides a unique benefit justifying exceeding the risk of the exceeding the over-sateration level.

Public Health & Safety Records
The City of Encinitas has previous staff reports documenting alcohol over-saturation as a public health and safety concern. A 2016 City Staff Report to the Planning Commission specifically addressed this topic and there are numerous studies that correlation the issue with increased crime.

Key Finding: Numerous peer-reviewed studies establish a direct correlation between alcohol over-saturation in geographic areas and exponential increases in crime rates. Research from medical and public health institutions confirms this relationship.

Relevant Research Reference
Medical Xpress Article: "The Relationship Between Alcohol Outlets and Traffic" Studies demonstrate that areas with high concentrations of alcohol outlets experience elevated traffic incident rates, including DUI-related collisions.

CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY STAFF
The City Council should direct staff to provide responses to the following questions in the official record:

1. Alcohol Over-Saturation Trend Analysis: Have there been studies conducted since the 2016 staff report showing whether alcohol over-saturation in Encinitas is improving or worsening? What is the current trajectory?

2. Cost-Benefit Analysis: What is the true net cost and benefit to the City for its current alcohol saturation status? This analysis must include:

Direct and indirect impacts to public health and safety Estimated costs associated with increased DUI incidents, traffic collisions, and emergency response
Projected loss of life and serious injury
Revenue generated from alcohol service licenses and related business activity

3. Review Process:

Are staff reports on alcohol saturation being submitted to the Planning Commission for all relevant permit applications?
If not, why has this regulatory tool not been utilized?

PROPOSED ACTION & MOTION
Specific Request to City Council
Approve a resolution establishing a City Council policy to NOT approve any increases in alcohol service, seating areas, or distribution within our City, until such time as the City Council reviews and accepts a study showing the Alcohol Saturation Levels in Encinitas are at a desirable level as determined solely by the City Council.

Rationale
This motion accomplishes multiple objectives:

Ensures that public safety and other community quality of life issues are prioritized over short-term revenue increases
Provides staff with clear direction to conduct necessary analysis Establishes a measurable standard for alcohol saturation before additional permits are issued
Maintains local control over land use decisions in alignment with community values Addresses one of the core root causes of serious injuries and fatalities in Encinitas

CONCLUSION
The City Council has demonstrated strong commitment to preserving Encinitas' character and coastal charm while addressing public safety. This proposal is consistent with that commitment.

Infrastructure improvements—roundabouts, resurfaced streets, and updated traffic control measures—are essential. However, they cannot fully address DUI as a leading cause of traffic fatalities without parallel action to reduce alcohol over-saturation in our commercial zones.

Passing this motion is a meaningful step toward comprehensive road safety that honors both community values and public health.

Thank you for your consideration and your continued service to the City of Encinitas, and please confirm this email will become a part of the record on this item.

Respectfully submitted,
Thomas Frank, P.E.

From: Farahnaz
To: City Clerk
Subject: Special City Council Meeting - Roadway Safety and Traffic Enforcement - Item 1 Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 4:36:53 PM
CAUTION: External Email. Do not click any links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, verified their email address, and know the content is safe.

Hi,
I am writing to the city council as a citizen of Encinitas. I have lived here for over 40 years and in the last couple of years the problem with the traffic safety is getting worse and worse.

I think you need to listen to Safe Street Encinitas as they have very reasonable and working solution to the problem we are facing. It has been more than a year since the fatal accident in Encinitas Blvd. and yet we don't even have a simple Red light traffic camera installed on that intersection. This is a real problem that needs to be resolved immediately. As a citizen of Encinitas I am asking the mayor and the city council to put the safety of pedestrians over the convenience of the drivers and take actions suggested by Safe Street Encinitas.

Regards,
Farahnaz Faegh
"Yesterday I was clever so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise so I am changing myself.” Rumi

Encinitas City CouncilAugust 26, 2026

Encinitas City Council
August 26, 2026