Author: davisite

From the League of Women Voters:

Dear Friends,

Welcome all to a New Year and best wishes for a healthy and peaceful 2022.  

Regrettably, what first comes to our mind this month might be the remembrance of last year and the January 6th terrorist attack on our National Capital. Our Democracy survives, but the actions on that day remind us that we all need to actively protect our Republic and our voting rights. With that in mind, LWVDA leadership joins the National League of Women Voters (LWVUS) by asking our membership to urge Congress and the President to pass federal legislation protecting our right to vote and our democracy.  

January 6th Day of Remembrance and Action: This Thursday Jan 6th at 5:15 pm in Davis Central Park, the Davis League will host a local vigil in remembrance of those who defended our Democracy last year and in support of the League’s 101-year position on voting rights advocacy and representative democracy. In this we join other LWV state and local leagues who will host in-person and virtual events to commemorate the remembrance. We invite you to join this show of unity at the public remembrance event. Register here: https://www.mobilize.us/mobilize/event/434619/

Take Action: As League members, we believe a January 6th remembrance also offers an opportunity for us to take action. We encourage your action this month in supporting passage of 2 federal bills currently stalled in the Senate: the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.  

Please take the time this week and join your fellow League members by going to this Action Link to learn more about this legislation and take individual action. By contacting Senators Feinstein and Padilla to push for passage of this important legislation we can truly recognize the heroism of the men and women that protected the Capital and legislators of all political parties in defense of Democracy on January 6th, 2021. 

…..

Happy New Year,
Mary Jo Bryan
President
LWV Davis Area

by Colin Walsh

I delivered this comment to the Davis City Council on 10/19/21 and received a very unprofessional attack from Council Member Carson in return. The comment was given in relation to the "Affordable Housing Ordinance – Extension of Alternative Rental Housing Requirements and Preliminary Scope of Work for an Update of Affordable Rental Housing Requirements" agenda item in which the Council voted to extend the weak interim inclusionary affordable housing ordinance.

—–

On February 6 of 2018 the Davis City Council approved the 2^nd attempt at the Nishi project. This project had what has proven to be an unworkable exclusionary affordable housing that forces people accepted into the affordable housing to sharing a room. What’s worse is the combined cost of the two people who share the room is higher than that of market rate single room.  Worse there are only 264 affordable beds out of 2200 beds. Beds not units. Most of the market rate is not shared.

(more…)

2 Comments to City Council on 9/22/2021 regarding the DISC 2020 EIR process

————

Dear members of the Davis City Council,

I would like to object to the way the City is doing business in relation to the DISC EIR.

On the consent calendar of tonight’s agenda is a staff report detailing the actions taken by the City Manager while the council was in recess. Buried on the last page is a single line item disclosing that the City Manager approved almost $100,000 for an addendum to the EIR for the DISC project.

Previously, approval of this type of contract was done by council and the staff report revealed important information to the public about the EIR process. Several of us objected at that time that it was not enough information, and this time around we have even less information. The City should not advance the EIR of a major project like this – in secretive ways.

Further an addendum is not appropriate because there are significant new factors that have not been considered by the previous EIR.

1. There are changed circumstances due to COVID and how office space is used. This must be analyzed in the new EIR.
2. The new project has a much Higher proportion of the project dedicated to freeway adjacent retail. This is likely to have larger impacts on the downtown and must be studied. 
3. The previous biological surveys are now outdated and need to be redone.
4. Further revelations about the severity of climate change and how that will affect the project both in terms of adaptation and mitigation should also be considered in an update to the EIR.

Therefore, I also call on the Council to set a public scoping meeting for the new EIR immediately.

Please  ask that this item be pulled from the consent calendar and instruct the City Manager to immediately make the contract with Raney and outline of work be made public.

Thank you for your Consideration,

Colin Walsh

 

———-

Roberta Millstein, Consent calendar, item 4 D

Buried in this item is a line of a spreadsheet showing that the City manager approved payment to Raney Planning & Management to prepare a CEQA addendum for the new DISC 2022.

Two years ago, this approval was its own consent item, with documentation supporting the recommendation, and it had to be pulled from consent at the request of citizens.  Two years ago, staff originally thought an addendum to the previous EIR would be sufficient.  Then they said a supplement would be required – a higher level of analysis.  Some of us objected this still wasn’t enough.  Then they ended up needed to do hundreds of pages of a more detailed Subsequent EIR. 

It seems like the same mistakes keeping being repeated – at the last meeting, I and others highlighted the rushed process for DISC 2022 with not enough commission input, and now again with both old and new DISC we have a truncated EIR process without enough justification and transparency for the proposal to do just an addendum.

We still haven’t been given much information about this project, yet we are being told again that an addendum to the EIR will be enough.  The pandemic makes everything uncertain, particularly traffic and office occupancy.  They will need to figure out a way to project for that.  Downtown businesses are even more financially precarious and so the impact to them needs to be reconsidered.  And of course the biological surveys need to be redone, particularly for sensitive species such as the burrowing owl and various bat species.  Finally, the impacts of drought, fire, and smoke in our area due to climate change have become evident; these must be re-evaluated as well, especially in light of the loss of potentially mitigating agricultural land and increased traffic.

I request that this item be pulled from the consent and that the City manager be instructed to immediately make public the contract with Raney and outline of work to be performed.

I further request a public scoping period, including a public scoping meeting, on the updated EIR.

Thank you.

A letter to the Davis City Council from Don Shor

—

To the members of the Davis City Council,

This letter is in support of the appeal by Alan Hirsch of the tree removal permit, issued for Sutter Health, for the removal of 63 trees in order to make room for the installation of solar panels in their parking lot.

My concerns are about the process, the city’s overall policy for tree conservation, the efficacy of the mitigation proposed, failure to account for the value and many intangible benefits of trees, and the disturbing precedent of valuing solar panels over trees.

We need a discussion of the city’s commitment to an adequate and sustained urban tree canopy, clarity about which commissions would be best for actual oversight on an advisory basis, and how the process of removing large numbers of trees should be evaluated by staff, commissions, and the council.

Process.

I do not fault the city staff for this. These are policy issues that have been brought to the fore by the sheer number of trees being removed via a single application. There should be some threshold at which a removal that affects the city’s urban forest to this extent is not simply done by administrative review.

Mitigation.

The proposed mitigation needs to be evaluated by tree professionals. The recommendation by the NRC that the mature trees be moved reflects this lack of expert input. It is unlikely to succeed and would be a misdirection of resources.

Better planting of their entire parking area would be a better use of funds if it were done correctly. That includes new trees to shade as much asphalt as possible, with consideration given to the reduced options due to the presence of solar panels and shading issues. More open soil areas are needed to improve infiltration of natural rainfall and allow successful root development. Climate-ready landscaping should be installed wherever trees can’t be planted.

In fact, the city’s overall tree removal mitigation strategy needs to be evaluated with a particular emphasis on parking lots, both because they are especially important for urban heat island effect and because few, if any, of the parking lots in Davis meet the city’s 50% shading requirement.

(more…)

A new petition to restore Mace Blvd south of I-80 has been circulating recently. This week it reached 700 signatures.

You can see and sign the petition here:

http://chng.it/Ry7fQx96

 

text of the petition follows

—

The petition summarizes our problems and requirements for Mace restoration.  Since this is a summary of the responses to a survey I recently sent out, it of course doesn't include each individual's favorite fix, but I hope it is close enough so that you-all would be willing to sign. 

As two years’ experience has demonstrated, if we don't tell the City what we want, heaven only knows what they'll do.   If you are a south Davis resident and want the Davis City Council to fix Mace, please sign.     

Thanks!

Char  

PETITION TEXT 

Introduction 

The City of Davis’ initial rationale for the Mace Project was incorrect.  This social engineering experiment on an established neighborhood to constrict the major traffic artery between north and south Davis and “force residents out of their cars” failed to recognize that all the neighborhoods affected have a high percentage of retirees and commuters who cannot lead their daily lives on bicycles even if they might wish they could, no matter how much pressure the City applies.  The result is an intrinsically flawed design. 

South Davis residents have been living with the safety issues and problems caused by the current Mace Boulevard configuration for the last two years, and the problems, especially gridlock, are returning as people return to offices to work post COVID.  Regarding the Mace Mess, as of 5/27/21, the City’s webpage states “the County and City representatives will follow up in a few weeks to review any questions or clarifications from the County. A community meeting will follow with date and time to be announced. Further updates will be posted once the City and County representatives are able to meet again.”  

I have advised the City that south Davis residents require adequate lead time before this meeting, that is, at least a week advance notice.  It is not reasonable to expect residents to study and understand a cryptic road diagram during a 2-hour in-person or Zoom meeting, then comment on it in two minutes.  In addition to posting on Nextdoor and the City webpage, the City should email people from the email addresses on the sign-in sheets from public meetings from the last two years.  The City must post copies of the plans to be presented on the City webpage, on Nextdoor, on Facebook, and attach them to the emails sent out to the mailing list at least a week before meetings, so people will have time to understand what is proposed.

Survey 

Recently south Davis residents were surveyed about what they want to see done with Mace Boulevard.  Most of the features in the current Mace configuration are designed to take up roadway in an attempt to turn Mace into a residential street. 

The City has approximately 80 acres of infill property in central Davis on the north side of the freeway that would be perfect for the sort of residential/shopping/bicycling urban design the City has unsuccessfully attempted to force on south Davis residents.  The City needs to fix Mace and then focus on applying this design to Davis proper, where it would be more feasible and appropriate. 

Following is a summary of the survey results. What needs to be done is really very simple.

Summary 

Required Design Changes in Order of Importance to Respondents (MOST IMPORTANT FIRST)

1. Remove all bike lane curbs, the concrete maze on the west side of Mace from Cowell to Redbud, and all rock pile islands.
2. Restore both NB and SB second vehicle lanes on Mace from Cowell to Redbud.  Remove the suicide lane and use the roadway real estate to restore the second lanes.
3. Restore sweeping right turns at Mace and Cowell; provide adequate turn pockets at other intersections. 
4. Elevate bike lanes (providing sloped  curbs) and merge with pedestrian walkways
5. Design considerations:
6. Bi-directional bike lane on West side of Mace from Redbud to Cowell; no bike lane on East side of Mace, or
7. One-directional bike lanes on West and East sides of Mace from Redbud to Cowell; travel direction aligned with vehicle traffic. 
8. Reduce the width of all crosswalks and move them closer to the corners so that drivers have a clear line of sight when attempting to turn.
9.   San Marino Lights:
10. Design considerations: 
11. Remove massive San Marino light poles and refit San Marino lights with standard poles with RYG lights;  program them so that they do not signal when there is no cross traffic, or
12. Retain triple pairs of lights, but fit light poles with sensors so that they only flash when there is cross traffic. 

                                 iii.    Install pedestrian/bicyclist crossing buttons. 

1. When the second NB and SB lanes are restored to Mace, south Davis residents who are actual traffic engineers recommend that the City not plan on installing additional lights and high-tech sensors to the south until the results of the above changes are tested.  The expensive technology might not be necessary. 
2. Taper lanes from 2 SB lanes from San Marino to Montgomery to 1 lane; increase NB Mace lanes from 1 lane at Montgomery to 2 lanes by South El Macero Dr.
3. Add merged bike lane/sidewalk on the east side of Mace from Cowell to Chiles.  
4. Whoever owns the oleanders on both sides of Mace should keep them trimmed up over head height or remove them. 

RESIDENTS' COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS   

1. Most respondents liked the County’s innovative idea of elevated/merged bike/pedestrian lanes, although there were some questions:

       o   Some (not all) bicyclists felt that bi-directional bike lanes were more likely to cause accidents than one-way bike lanes.

       o   Some residents asked whether bike traffic should be required to travel in the same direction as vehicle traffic, regardless of bike lane design. 

2. Some residents asked if bike lanes would be necessary on both sides of Mace, especially if a bi-directional bike lane is built on the west side from Redbud through to Cowell.  
3. All residents (and especially residents facing Mace in the El Macero/N. El Macero to Redbud area) find the bike curbs and maze in this area dangerous and dysfunctional and want them removed.  This would also restore ADA access and residents’ on-street parking, as well as provide passage for agricultural equipment. 

An online petition is being circulated regarding traffic safety in the Cannery development. As of this post it has garnered 133 signatures in just a few days.

You can view or sign the petition here.

The petition reads as follows:

The current traffic conditions in the Cannery are dangerous, and we need increased traffic safety measures implemented as soon as possible. We have many children and elderly residents who do not currently feel safe in their own neighborhood, and there have been recent accidents and near-misses due to the lack of adequate traffic safety measures currently in place. 

Areas of special concern we would like to see:

• Stop signs at Blanchard & Vine (currently a four-way intersection with no stop signs)
• Stop signs at Spring & Kaneko (currently a four-way intersection with no stop signs)
• Cannery Loop: Speed limit signs, stop signs, and/or speed bumps (currently no safety measures in place)
• Pedestrian crosswalks: increased safety measures (e.g., flashing lights)
• Engineering and traffic survey throughout the Cannery, as there are numerous other safety concerns throughout the neighborhood that the City needs to evaluate

Thank you for your consideration and prompt attention to this matter.

Northern California 60s legend Gary Lee Yoder, of The Oxford Circle, Kak and Blue Cheer, passed away this weekend from numerous health complications. His friend Alec Palao remembers one of the coolest rockers around.

It’s not easy to explain why Gary Yoder was, and is, important. As nonchalant as the man could be, he had that intangible quality that is the sign of true artistry. Gary wrote simple but effective songs and delivered them with disarming confidence and a most soulful set of pipes. A Yoder tune could wistfully ponder ‘I’ve Got Time’, vent full-on hormonal rage in ‘Foolish Woman’, or play the psychedelic nudge-and-wink in ‘Lemonaide Kid.’ His vocal personae could snarl like Burdon or Morrison, extrude vowels like Dylan, or mimic the gentle cadence of Donovan. But these were influences, not imitations: Gary Yoder had very much his own style, and he remains one of those talents whom for whatever reason never made the transition to the big time. Instead, his legacy centres around his role as founder member of two legendary and distinctly different cult acts, time spent resuscitating a San Francisco rock institution, and a subsequent career that saw four decades of solid work as a much respected solo act and bandleader in his hometown of Davis, California.

An army brat who had spent his youngest years in Germany, Japan and various parts of the United States, Yoder ended up in Davis in 1961 when his father got a job at UC Davis. As a musician, he started with the expected folk music, but having always loved rock, he formulated a band together after graduating high school with pals Jim Keylor, Dehner Patten and Paul Whaley. This was The Hide-Aways, who soon shifted from small Davis gigs to take on the much more competitive group scene in nearby Sacramento, where surf was king. “We never did any Beach Boys or any of that kind of crap,” Gary told me. “We played Chuck Berry!” The quartet was equally fired by the British Invasion, and especially the rough soul of groups like the Animals, Yardbirds and Them. By the beginning of 1966 they had become The Oxford Circle, named for the girls’ dorm on the UC campus, and an appellation more than appropriate for the unit’s Anglophilic predilections.

(more…)

By Ron Oertel

I've recently learned that the “Davis Vanguard” is not a safe place in which to comment, unless you don’t mind experiencing doxing in violation of the Vanguard’s own policies, which are further discussed below.

When I first started commenting (several years ago), “real” names were not even required.  Some suspected that more than one fake name/account was used, by some individual commenters.  I have always used my real name, and added my last name when the Vanguard changed its policy to require full names.

However, no one “signed-up” for doxing as a result of that change in commenting requirements.  Perhaps this result is predictable on a political blog in which moderation occurs “after” posting of comments – if at all.

In any case, the Vanguard is also a place to avoid if you don’t like having your comments labeled as racist by those intending to discredit others (which I’ve learned to laugh about).  You can see a recent example of the latter responded to here,  from the same commenter who is being defended by the Vanguard in regard to violating their own policies.  So, if the doxing doesn’t discourage you from challenging the Vanguard, perhaps having your comments labeled as “racist” will.

Perhaps it’s not a “coincidence” that the commenter whose name-calling and doxing attempts (also) repeatedly attacks me in regard to development issues that the Vanguard supports.  But this article isn’t primarily about having comments called “racist”, and the example above occurred after I decided to write this article.  Nor is it actually about the commenter himself – it’s about how the Vanguard administers its own policies, especially when its views are challenged.

(more…)

I was greatly disturbed to learn that the Planning Commission has given Sutter Davis Hospital the green light to remove 205 mature trees from its parking lots, ostensibly to make room for solar panels. While producing renewable energy is critically important, it does not need to be done at the expense of existing trees, which have been providing shade, habitat and health-promoting natural beauty for years. Instead Sutter should demonstrate responsible environmental leadership by installing solar panels on its abundant flat rooftops and other largely treeless sections of its property. The City Council should reject the Planning Commission's blanket approval of this misguided project, about which neither the Tree Commission nor Tree Davis were consulted, and insist that this and all future proposals of this type receive robust public review and discussion.