I-80 before City Council on Tuesday

Caltrans wants to turn the Davis Climate Plan into a just a carbon offset

By Alan Hirsch

On Tuesday January 9^th council meeting there will be a discussion on DEIR for I-80 widening.

Please show up to the Davis Council and object to this project that won’t fix congestion for long…but will destroy Davis Climate plan by turning it into a carbon offset- An offset so others can drive more on the wider freeway.   Toll lanes also create social inequity as it allows the richest to buy out of congest so there is no incentive to work for good public transit system.

Housing costs are also impacted- by allowing others to live in Davis and commute even further — remember the Cannery homes was advertised for sale in the Bay Area.

Key ask: City should ask that Caltrans “recirculate the corrected DEIR as  it is deeply flawed.

Local elected officials (Josh Chapman) continue to stand with Caltrans-and deny science from UC Davis… because they have been in effect bribed by congress with $86million in free starter money to give up our climate plan- trouble is $200 million is missing.    (Congress was likely lobbied by business interests in Sac, Bay Area and Tahoe rich folk who love a toll lane so they can opt out of traffic.)

Three Ways to Comment to Council Tuesday

1. In person at council chamber agenda -8pm agenda item : https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/city-council/city-council-meetings/agendas   Staff report (see City staff Draft letter to Caltrans which affirm  below concerns ) https://documents.cityofdavis.org/Media/Default/Documents/PDF/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/Agendas/2024/2024-01-09/08-Yolo-80-Manged-Lanes-Draft-EIR.pdf
2. Leave voice mail (12-4) on Tuesday JAN 9^th: 530-757-5603 (2 minutes)
3. Send a message to council: citycouncilmembers@cityofdavis.org

Issues with Caltrans Draft Environmental Impact Report

1. The city needs to request Caltrans recirculate the DEIR after corrects because so many issues needed addressed. Not to do so invites a lawsuit- an unnecessary expenditure public funds. .
2. Only for GHG- but Caltrans finally accepted UC Davis numbers about induced demand travel –.  180 Million VMT Miles year equal 12K car or 15% of city GHG. Yet Caltrans has decided this was “insignificant” after just 43% mitigation. (see 6 below).
3. This addition to GHG/VMT travel is contra to State, County and Davis climate plans. This admission alone should be the end of discussion about “unavoidable impact” until Caltrans studies transit alternative-for the corridor to fix congestion and provide everyone a travel choice. . Caltrans had underplayed its I-80 CMCP study that says upgrading Cap corridor trains to 100 mph is 15x more cost effective than freeway widening.
4. NOT FIXED: The Caltrans traffic forecast model continue to overstate congestion relief from project as their modeling still does not include Induced traffic.  Thus, all the future travel time forecast by Caltrans remain incorrect. City staff say this…but excuse the model as  “best we have now”. UC Davis researcher Amy Lee points out Caltrans has refused to update their models for induced demand.  Should willful ignorance to be used to justify negating the climate plan and spending $400+ mil – when transit alternatives not even considered?
5. No discussion cut thru Traffic on Mace Blvd in DEIR. This project won’t fix it for long was conclusion by Davis Transportation Commission
6. We don’t have the missing $200-$350 million to do the project:  Just because we got starter $86 million is not reason to go ahead. Who is picking up the rest of the tab?
7. The  “mitigation plan” is to turn Davis VMT/GHG reduction climate plan into a carbon offset.  They expect Davisites (and others in Yolo) to driving less (via TDM & better bus service) so that Solano, Sac and Bay area resident can drive more (180 Mil miles) on the wider freeway.
8. Even this mitigation plan is just 43% of the GHG created. i.e., a setback for State, Local and City Climate Plan.
9. The mitigation plan offset for 43% VMT is largely unfunded. The cost of shifting 10-14,000 rider to some form of transit is a $55/year. However, this likely only covers the operation costs, not cost of buses and rail vehicles. The VMT offset number they suggest they can create is equal to 4/5 of the entire ridership of RT light rail system- which cost billions to construct. The DEIR also lacks proof the toll lane revenue will fund the $55mil, especially when they are giving most Tahoe traffic a free pass.
10. No transit alternatives for the 90% traveler on causeway are not from Yolo County. No corridor wide transit improvement was studied in DEIR- from Berkeley Vallejo, Vacaville or even Dixon to Davis/Sac were studied. Caltrans ignored one study (I-80 CMCP) showed upgrading the cap corridor rail service to 100 MPH is 15x more cost effective.  
11. Caltrans DEIR outreach/open house was performative: they did not disclose the VMT increase and it GHG effect to those attending,  They failed even have a provide a fully copy of DEIR on sight- or in library next door. Library still do not have a full copy of the DEIR on their shelves.
12. Favoring Tahoe Traffic: The Yolo Transportation Board voted to make the toll lane “free” for group of 3 or more, thus favoring recreation travelers to Tahoe who are most likely to travel in groups. This policy would be unlike to create any more carpooling (who would carpool to Tahoe to save  a $10 toll?) but shift the burden of paying to mitigate travel to local residents.