Del Mar’s City Council agreed Monday to ask regional planners to postpone building the fully funded San Dieguito railroad bridge until a route is chosen for a tunnel to take the tracks off the eroding coastal bluffs.
Construction of the $350-million, double-tracked, steel-reinforced concrete bridge to replace a century-old wooden trestle across the San Dieguito River is set to start in early 2026. However, some of the alternate routes being considered for the tunnel would go around the bridge, making it unnecessary.
Last summer, the San Diego Association of Governments released an official “notice of preparation” for an environmental impact report on three possible routes for the realignment, which would move about 1.7 miles of the railroad tracks off the eroding coastal bluffs south of the river in Del Mar.
The coastal rail route is part of what’s called the LOSSAN corridor, covering 351 miles between San Diego, Los Angeles and San Luis Obispo. It is San Diego’s only railroad connection to Los Angeles and the rest of the United States.
Residents of Del Mar and Solana Beach, as well as Del Mar Fairgrounds officials, have strong objections to all three routes proposed in the notice and have asked for other routes to be considered. Their ideas include moving the tracks to the Interstate 5 right-of-way from Oceanside to San Diego, or building a bridge along the coast above the beach in Del Mar. Planners have said those suggestions are impractical and unlikely.
Any of the routes proposed so far through Del Mar or Solana Beach is certain to require the acquisition of private property through eminent domain. Most of the likely routes would take passenger and freight trains beneath people’s homes. Construction will bring years of noise, traffic and disruption to nearby neighborhoods.
“It does not take a rocket scientist to see that this may not go well for Del Mar,” said Councilmember John Spelich, who was elected to his first term in November.
Any SANDAG construction project takes years of planning and preparation followed by lengthy efforts to obtain funding. SANDAG officials have said that because of that timeline, the bridge project probably will be completed no matter what route is chosen for the tunnel.
Any additional routes or significant changes to the three routes proposed would require a new notice of preparation, which could set the project back at least a year. SANDAG’s most recent timeline calls for the tunnel to be finished by 2035, if the more than $4 billion in construction funding becomes available.
In September, SANDAG announced it would do a value analysis for a closer look at the many comments submitted on the proposed routes and whether other routes should be included. The report on that analysis is expected early this year, though no date has been announced.
Del Mar Councilmember Dan Quirk continues to maintain there is no need for a tunnel. He said Monday the train is an “antiquated notion” and that the entire 60 miles of the corridor in San Diego County should be eliminated and replaced by a public trail.
“There is zero risk of a tunnel being built in Del Mar,” Quirk said Monday, adding that the new Republican majority in Congress will stop it.
“This is exactly the kind of project they would target for elimination,” he said. Quirk has pushed for a harder look at all government spending.
Most federal, state and local officials have said the railroad is essential to the regional economy, also as a transportation option to supplement the region’s crowded freeways and to reduce harmful greenhouse gases.
Councilmember Tracy Martinez said she respectfully disagrees with Quirk.
“We can’t assume there will not be a tunnel,” Martinez said. “Things are moving forward. We need to assume this is going to happen.”
She and other council members said they will oppose any use of eminent domain in Del Mar, and they will encourage SANDAG to select a route that avoids taking the tunnel beneath any Del Mar homes or businesses.
City officials and residents will be allowed to comment on the value analysis report when it is presented to the SANDAG board of directors in the next few months.
If SANDAG issues a new notice of preparation, that would trigger another 45-day period for the public to submit comments on the revised proposal.
Originally Published:
