Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

Category: Transportation

  • 5th & J Streets – Emergency Situation

    5th&J Image

    Open Letter to Davis City Council

    Davis City Council,

    Another collision at 5th & J Street today.  Car vs. Bike.

    Right after I called for Jersey barriers again at Council last night after the last collision. 

    This is an emergency situation.  Two collisions just this week, four in one week several weeks back.  Put up the goddamned Jersey barriers already, like today, like tomorrow.  Recognize that people are getting hurt at an alarming rate here.  I made a mistake being OK that the changes are coming after calling for Jersey barriers immediately after the four accidents a few weeks back. We can't wait.

    Here's how to do it:  put Jersey barriers on the left of each directional lane leading up to the intersection, and along the left-turn lane.  The left-turn lanes will face each other, so block the west to south lane, and allow east to north.  Put a 4' gap on each side for peds & bikes at crosswalks.  Do this also at I Street and K Street.  Similar site problems, and drivers will just cut over to I or K if J is blocked.  At I and K Street reverse which left turn lane is blocked, so cars can only go west to south.  This allows people to get into the neighborhood from 5th either direction, but prevents a 'face-off' between cars in the two left-turn lanes.  Then slap a vertical yellow reflector on the east and west ends of the Jersey barriers to prevent cars from hitting them.

    This has been going on for years, but the rate of collisions has increased greatly recently.  I live near the corner of 3rd & J Streets.  3rd is a bit less busy but still an arterial.  I can't recall ever seeing a collision there.  In over 35 years.  I'm sure it's happened, but it's rare.  So it isn't just bad drivers, it's the intersection.

    People keep asking why.  5th & J has inherent site problems.  These can't be fixed with shrub trimming – there are poles and trees in just the wrong places.  Going south to cross, you have to stop back of the stop line, then pull forward up to the bike lane, stop, and then pull across.  It's the only safe way to do it, but most people who don't use it regularly don't know this, nor is stopping twice a normal way to cross a street.  You get someone who pulls forward from the stop line with their site line blocked in just the wrong places, combined with a speeding car on 5th, and BOOM.  And it happens often.

    Do it!  Fix it!  Today!  Now!  No later than tomorrow!

    Alan C. Miller

    Old East Davis

  • Davis City Council Agenda Item 7- 2025 Pavement Management Update Recommendation

    By Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser

    • Direct City staff to provide funding in the forthcoming two-year budget of $14 million per year (from all sources), including an increase in General Fund resources of $5.5 million per year from Measure Q sales tax increase funding approved by Davis voters, for support of the Pavement Maintenance Program. The $14 million amount represents the funding identified by city staff in a December 2024 presentation to Council that would be needed over four years to make up for previous shortfalls in funding for road and bike path maintenance that have occurred in recent years.
    • Direct city staff to return to Council with a recommendation in regard to the additional staff and contract resources, if necessary, that should be incorporated into the 2025-27 budget plan to implement the program at the funding level provided above.
    • Restore the process the Council established in 2019 for commission review and oversight of the Pavement Maintenance Program. The Fiscal Commission should:
      1. Examine why the reported condition of street and bike path pavement improved significantly in recent years, nearly reaching the original goals set by Council, despite significant funding shortfalls, and evaluate whether future technical adjustments are warranted to reassess the model used to project the level of funding required for the program.
      2. Evaluate the potential impact of the planned Cool Pavement federal grant program to determine whether any further increases or decreases are warranted for city funding levels for pavement management, due to improvements to roads expected to be achieved under the federal grant program.
      3. Review the specific proposed funding components of the 2019 Council-approved plan for pavement maintenance to:
        • Determine whether, and to what degree, they have been implemented by city staff, and why;
        • Determine which, if any of them, are still feasible and available to assist in future funding of the Pavement Management Program;
        • Estimate the fiscal impact of frontloading rather than backloading funding to maintain roads and bike paths over the next ten years. The Council should direct city staff to assist the Fiscal Commission in all four areas of this review.

    Background

    (more…)

  • NE Transportation Corridor – Tonight on City Council Agenda @8:40pm

    Open Letter to City Council on NE Transportation Corridor Item 7 (8:40pm, Tues 4/1)

    City Council,

    I may not be able to attend tonight so am making email comments here.

    I appreciate your taking up the NE Transportation Corridor.  As specified, the item as written would be part of the General Plan.  From the staff report, this involves more detail than the concept suggested by the Davis Citizens Planning Group (DCPG or close to that name).  

    I also came up with the almost identical idea of a transportation corridor north and east of Covell/Mace to run through the new suburbs, as a BRT or Bus Rapid Transit corridor parallel to a bike line.  As separate citizens came up with almost identical comments, perhaps the consultants should meet soon with the citizens for initial input, rather than or in addition to the consultants having citizens comment on the consultant's plans.

    Here are the basic features that I believe I and DCPG agree on:

    • There would be minimal stops as per BRT standards (1/4-1/2 mile spacing).
    • The corridor would not be for automobiles
    • There would be and adjacent and parallel bike track on the south/west of the corridor.
    • There would be minimal intersections, with only major arteries crossing the corridor to minimize conflicts.
    • The BRT would continue into Davis on regular roads, with some upgrades for the BRT infrastructure.
    • The Route:
      • The BRT would start at shopping center south of Hwy. 80 along Mace (Nugget) for a SE anchor.
      • The route would cut east on the north side of the tracks to access the corridor.
      • The dedicated corridor would continue in an arc north and west parallel to the curve of Mace and Covell.
      • At Wildhorse, the BRT could divert south to Covell, or use the 'cut-through lot' to access Moore and run to Moore & Pole Line.
      • From there the BRT could continue through Village Homes or south on Pole Line.
      • The BRT would serve Oakshade Shopping Center
      • The BRT would then continue Covell–>F Street–>Amtrak–>First Street–>South Campus (Library Silo)–>West Village
    • Each development could proceed on its own once the basic route is confirmed through the to-be-developed areas, as long as all developers agreed to link to the future through corridor once each segment is built.
    • The new route should minimize turns and instead follow a smooth arc.
    • IMPORTANT:  Building density for each development should be at its maximum nearest bus stops and along the corridor, and step to medium and to lowest densities (per project) as one gets further from the corridor.

    I believe the transportation corridor placement needs to be negotiated and agreed to with each landowner/developer far in advance of the General Plan Update.  This will allow the corridor to be whole and usable once all developments are in place.

    Alan C. Miller

  • Again? Freeway-to-Sac’s Closure Postponed – now Indefinitely

    By Alan Hirsch

    Below is the core of Caltrans press release issued Wednesday 3/12 at 3:28pm announcing postponement of the Eastbound 50 Freeway in West Sac closure for this weekend. They say indefinitely—but it could be forever as they may figure out how to do the pavement rehab work while keeping some of regular 3 lanes up.

    But if they reschedule total closure another weekend later in March, drivers will have to contend traffic from with opening of the A’s and River cat baseball season to Sutter Health Park.

    This will may push out the work… and could conflict with the schedule to begin work to widened i-80 with toll lane- which is set to begin just next month. The Toll Lane construction work – Phase I of it– will continue into 2028.

    For previous articles on evolving (potential) freeway closure, click here , here2.and here3. 

    Note the bike lane will also be continue thru Monday 3/17 next week- but could go longer as Caltrans notes unhelpfully “weather permitting”.

    Editorial: This indefinite postponement could be due to pushbacks to Caltrans from local city council members and state representatives- after receiving calls from constituents. We will likely never know.  It is strange the freeway closure was not announced or discussed during YoloTD board meetings even though Caltrans was present – only in public comment. One wonders, for example, if there will be a total west bound closure too.

    (more…)

  • Dual Freeway/Bridge shutdowns a perfect traffic storm

    Double Bridge-Freeway shutdown to hit West Sac

    By Alan Hirsch, Yolo Mobility

    Image001 1203

    Seen Friday in West Sacramento at the tower bridge

    Both US 50 freeway in West Sac and the Tower Bridge look to be 100% shut down for periods this coming weekend. Combine this with likely congestion on Jefferson  blvd  entrance to 50 where freeway reopens, this could be a perfect storm for residents of West Sac who may not be able to leave their neighborhoods due to cut-thru Freeway traffic congesting local streets, a detour Caltrans suggests for freeway drivers in its press releases. Caltrans press release seems unaware the Tower bridge will also be shut for a charity event both Saturday and Sunday AM until 1pm.

    As reported previously here and here are reprinted Caltrans press releases reporting, east bound highway 50 freeway will be closed in West Sac from the 50-80 split at Enterprise Blvd to Jefferson Blvd. This beginning next Friday 3/14  at 9pm thru Monday, and opening only Tuesday 3/18  at 5am. This is for Caltrans pavement rehab work and is not related to widening to add the I-80 Yolo toll lane, whose construction is yet to begin. The press release seems to indicate east bound drivers can still go north on I-80 at the split to Natomas.

    (note- as told to me Monday night at YoloTD meeting, US 50 shut it may yet be put back again to another weekend-—when it will conflict with Baseball season openers at Sutter Health field.)

    (more…)

  • Complete Freeway Closure to Sac delayed by one week

    EB US 50 Closed Friday 3/14 9pm to Tues 3/18 5am

    (Weekday Causeway Bike Path closure also)

    By Caltrans & Alan Hirsch  

    Image006 102Released Wed. 3/5 begin: “Caltrans is alerting motorists that this weekend’s extended connector closure for the ongoing Yolo Interstate 80 (I-80) and U.S. Highway 50 (US-50) Pavement Rehabilitation Project has been postponed (emphasis added) because of the weather forecast for rain and cold temperatures. The work has been rescheduled for the following weekend.”

    AH Annotation #1: What Caltrans means to say is US 50 east bound in West Sac from I-80 split to Jefferson Ave will be 100% closed Friday 9pm thru Tuesday 5am 3/14 thu 3/18- a week later than stated in previous press release. Please use local streets in West Sacramento instead. “expect delays”. (see below)

    AH Annotation #2: The Yolo Causeway bicycle path also is scheduled to be closed all next week for repair work. Caltrans are not- but should be  –providing a bus “bike bridge” for that period. They bury this in press release.

    AH Annotation #3: This was announced late last week for this weekend but has been delayed by a decision of Caltrans and contractor.  That this will cause a major inconvenience to local residents & Tahoe traffic – who are likely planning their life around closure. This closure will also cause cut-thru traffic on local streets in all three Yolo County cities. Caltrans is even suggesting drivers use local street in West Sac as alternative to the 3 lane freeway. See below.

    AH Annotation #4. If you think Caltrans is treating public cavalierly, write “Chair and member, Yolo Transportation District board (YoloTD) and tell them at link below. Public has complained to board in the past about lack of information from Caltrans on I-80 construction. YoloTD gave Caltrans $100million to”fix” i-80 in May of 2024. clerk YoloTD public-comment@Yctd.org

    (more…)

  • 100% closure I-50 to Sacto next weekend

    Expect cut thru traffic in Davis, Woodland, West Sac

    By Alan “Lorax” Hirsch & Caltrans

    Image006 103

    Official Caltrans map routing Freeway Traffic onto local streets in West Sac

    The essence of Thursdays Caltrans press release is simple, but its repercussions to hundreds of thousands of people are wider ranging: “I-50 east bound to Sacto in West Sacramento will be 100% closed (after the split) for 3 1/2 days, from Fri. 3/7 9pm to Tues. 3/11 5am.

    Its impacts will be felt by hundreds of thousands of travelers- including Sac airport users from Yolo/Solano now facing congestion on I-5 causeway, workers on Monday, and of course Tahoe vacationers on Friday & Saturday. Those dependent on the bus will also be affected:

    80,000 cars cross the Yolo causeway– each direction — every day.

    There will also be an impact on local travel inside Davis, West Sacramento, and Woodland.  Local residents can expect cut thru traffic delays as, traffic is likely to backup over the causeway deep into Davis and traffic will cut up Pole Line and 113 and backup the I-5 Causeway to the airport as has happen on other occasions. And of course south Mace in Davis will likely be effected.  West Sac travel on West Capitol and Industrial & Jefferson will be “affected” as they parallel the closed freeway section- as will Yolo buses that use this segment.

     

    (more…)

  • Letter: Annual Budget Reduced to Repair roads, bike paths and sidewalks.

    The City wants to tax us another $11 million per year on the ballot as Measure Q. They claim the money will be used to provide new services, but they don’t tell us what new services. Well I have a problem with spending millions on new services when the City can’t even maintain what it already has.

    Everywhere you go in town you can see the awful state of our roads, bike paths and sidewalks. They are in terrible shape. We now have far worse roads than West Sacramento or Woodland. It was promised this would be taken care of by the city when we approved the renewal of the previous 1% sales tax hike, but since then things have only deteriorated even further.

    And the City Council approved reducing last year’s road maintenance budget by $1.5 million. Where did that money go? I’ll tell you where it went- it went to increase employee salaries and the development of new programs.

    Let’s face it, responsible budgeting means taking care of necessities first, but that is not what is happening. The city keeps asking for more money from citizens in the form of increased taxes to pay for all their “nice to have” pet projects, which are being put ahead of essential maintenance and services. It is time for citizens to say “enough is enough” and vote “NO on Q" for more tax increases until the City Council starts acting more responsibly and accountable to the tax-payers.

    Don Price

  • Dangerous Bike Lanes: Automobile Normativity Breeds Neglect (Part 1 of 3)

     

    PXL_20240815_190057157.RAW-01.COVER

    East Covell, Westbound, between the Mace Curve and Alhambra. See Video. Reported on 8/1/2024. Based on my understanding of how My Davis Requests are processed, this has not even been evaluated at time of writing. 

    Davis, CA -  I've been riding a bike in cities for most of my adult life – that's forty years. As an example for others I don't often say that something feels safe; but when I feel a situation is dangerous it's a more valid perspective to share. 

    For the last six weeks or so I've had to travel two times a week from my home near Mace and Cowell to Sutter Davis. The fastest way there by car is via 80 and 113; by bicycle it's Mace to East and then West Covell.  I have an e-bike, and it takes about 23 minutes, a bit longer if I don't make the lights, and longer still if I have to slow or even stop to avoid hitting overgrowth of trees and bushes into the bike lane, and slower if I have to stop to let vehicles pass when the overgrowth extends all the way to the edge of the traffic lane. 

    "In some situations when the tree concern appears to be an immediate safety hazard [emphasis mine] the Street division will respond and put up barricades or traffic control to block off the area until tree work can be done. When the Urban Forestry division assesses the tree they determine the urgency of the concern and who the work will be assigned to. They also consider if the tree is the City’s responsibility to maintain. If a tree is blocking the public right of way per the clearance standards for that specific area they will assign pruning of the tree to meet clearance standards for the roadway, bike lane, sidewalk or path. Prune may be done but City Urban Forestry staff or by our contract arborist, currently West Coast Arborist. Work is completed based on the priority assessment conducted by one of the City’s Certified Arborist. If you have any additional questions please contact us …" – from a response to an earlier complaint. 

    How in this cornhole-tomato industrial apocalypse is the situation in the photo above  not an "immediate hazard"? As of time of writing,  along the westbound (WB) route between Mace and Sutter Davis, there are just over 30 bushes and trees which are "overgrowth" – the City's term – in the bike lane. Some require a diversion into the buffer (which is not a passing lane, and only part of this route has painted buffers), some require a diversion into the traffic lane,  some require ducking under possibly sharp branch ends (ironically, the by-product of earlier trimming….). 

    Along this route I first reported overgrowth on the NB Mace Blvd overpass on July 27.  It's still there, requiring a quick maneuver to avoid this punji stick, but – watch out! – not so far into the traffic lane! 

    What's curious is that "Closed" seems to only mean that the problem is solved in regards to potholes (and similar). "Closed" in relation to overgrowth on city property such as Covell indicates that the issue has been forwarded to the City's trees department, and with private property it means it went to the police for code enforcement.  I have mentioned this and suggested that "Closed" should only be used if the issue is resolved (or fixed, etc) or some kind of interim category should be created to show it's in process. While non-anonymous issue filers receive updates via email, it would be better if everything was more clear in the My Davis App. 

    So… a real question is what's a realistic timeframe for the City to respond to what is objectively an "immediate hazard"? BUT the better real question is:

    Would this be tolerated in [motor vehicle] traffic lanes for weeks at a time?

    What would people who drive motor vehicles do if their daily route required diversions, stopping, making sure a big truck wasn't going to ram into them, multiple times a week on the way to work or an errand?

    The answer is simple: The city would clear it immediately, or with a bit of delay during an exceptional weather event. They would clear the traffic lane or lanes. This is how it works here, and my personal experience for the last seven years I've lived here. 

    The roughly similar – but roughly more seasonal issue – is yard waste in bike lanes. It's explicitly completely illegal under city rules; "overgrowth" is not. Both are equally dangerous. 

    Reviewing City Hall minutes from ten years ago… many things regarding yard waste in bike lanes were promised. When I was on the BTSSC (RIP) – actually the night that Officer Natalie Corona (RIP) was killed  – the Commission supported my wording of a recommendation to City Council to improve things. (It's perhaps worth noting that the immediate sequence of events that resulted in a person with serious behavioral health issues killing Officer Corona started with a vehicle crash on 5th St – things like that with cars are seen as normal, and are forgotten). The Council watered it down and nothing improved, or changed (with the exception of a few signs in certain areas simply referring to the existing regulation.) 

    I have very little hope that the Council, Staff and relevant Commissions will do anything about it. Case in point: School starts today! Did DJUSD work with the City in the last weeks  to ensure that our City's safe routes to school (SRTS).. are safe? Beyond my ride to Sutter Davis I can say that they have not. There's lateral pot holes and overgrowth all over. 

    Measure Q?  It makes general promises about improvements, but why would Davis change now and target the needs of the most vulnerable road users? It's never been the priority: The City chronically builds infrastructure that's not compliant with the 2016 Street Standards  — while simultaneously referring to then as "progressive" when it is going forward on a street project. The BTSSC was never consulted about the ongoing 10-year pavement plan nor the overlapping Cool Pavements project. 

    The City's not making it feel safe for me to get around… my sense is that those who are younger or have less experience with bicycles simply don't consider the fastest routes if they feel unsafe on them. Do people who normally drive not take certain routes in town because they feel dangerous?

    *****

    In the following additional examples, there is also the before and after of a sewer grate on the Mace overpass damaged to the level where one could stand a bike up in it, and its "fix", a few months after being reported. Some fine craftsmanship, there!

    There's also a screenshot from the City's "What Do you Do?" video series of very light and uncritical portraits of city staff and their job duties. Why wasn't this slip up about "world" never corrected? 

    Additional photography and video from the Mace overpass on NB Mace to E. Covell just west of Pole Line.

    *****

    Parts 2 and 3 coming soon: 

    Part 2: What the City plans to do about yard waste and other materials in bike lanes – a ridiculous new tool. 

    Part 3: What the City should be doing (and why success of Measure Q might not help very much.)

    *****

    What can you do now? 

    * Write the Transportation Commission (copying to City Council, new Active Transportation Coordinator Sereena Rai and the City's tree department):  tc@cityofdavis org, citycouncilmembers@cityofdavis.org, srai@cityofdavis.org,citytrees@cityofdavis.org.

    * Ask the League of American Bicyclists if Davis deserves its "Platinum Bike Friendly" rating: bfa@bikeleague.org (there is not an application currently under review — this is just a cheeky way to get this corrosive garbage on their radar.)

    * Ask the Board of the Davis Joint Unified School District if the situation is safe for students, and if they got the City to check for obstructions – including potholes – on safe routes to schools in Davis before the first of day of class today: boe@djusd.net.

  • Will City & County Prioritize Yet More money for I-80?

    Missing funds may continue to compromise transit

    Image001 1699

    Map of what’s planned: : Phase I of Yolo80 widening will only be west of the 50/80 split in West Sacramento- We are missing $265 Mil

    By Alan Hirsch 

    This is a report on the untalked about short falls in funding on I-80Yolo projects (plural), changes to the freeway from Dixon across the Sacramento River bridges for both US 50 and I-80. We are told the freeway here is in crisis (Like the climate crisis?)

    Other have noted the short thinking of funding highway widening continue to “crowd out” funding of substantial transit improvements and that keeps us from addressing climate change and providing travel choices to driving.

    For example, on I80 Yolo the total bill is a jaw dropping $745 million- 40 times the Yolobus budget.

    Caltrans and freeway proponent all through the decision-making process on I80 have not make clear its full cost and long term impacts. They have instead  levered an initial $86 Million federal grant – which we are told we dare not give back – to lock us into spending hundreds of million more. A sum that effectively  crowd out investment in transit.

    (more…)