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

  • Recommendation for revision and recirculation of the DEIR for the I-80 widening project

    The following letter was submitted this morning by Dr. Stephen Wheeler and the Sierra Club Yolano Group as formal comments for the Yolo 80 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), addressed to Dr. Masum Patwary, Environmental Scientist C at the California Department of Transportation. A copy was also sent to the Davis City Council. The letter concludes by stating that the Yolo 80 DEIR should be revised and recirculated.

    Dear Dr. Patwary:

    This letter provides detailed comments on the Yolo 80 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on behalf of the Yolano Group of the Motherlode Chapter of the Sierra Club.

    I have prepared these comments as an unpaid Technical Advisor to the Yolano Group. In my professional life I am a Professor of Urban Planning and Design in the Department of Human Ecology at the University of California, Davis, and Chair of the UC Davis Community Development Graduate Group. I have studied urban and regional planning topics for more than 35 years, including interactions between transportation systems and regional land use patterns, and was formerly chair of the City of Berkeley Transportation Commission and cofounder of the Bay Area’s regional transportation-land use-housing advocacy organization Transform. I am the author of urban planning textbooks used in universities worldwide, including The Sustainable Urban Development Reader (Fourth Edition, 2023), Planning for Sustainability (Third Edition to be published in late 2024), and Reimagining Sustainable Cities (2021). My awards in this field include the Dale Prize for Excellence in Urban and Regional Planning.

    Let me say first that it’s very unfortunate that the Yolo 80 project has proceeded this far without better alternatives being considered. As has been widely known for decades, widening freeways does not fix congestion problems; it just defers them for a few years while increasing overall motor vehicle use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, local air pollution, suburban sprawl, and related problems. The climate crisis gives particular urgency to the need to stop increasing road capacity and vehicle use. Although California is making progress in many sectors towards reducing its GHG emissions, transportation is one area in which it is not. Transportation is also the single largest source of the state’s GHG emissions, accounting for 38 percent of the total.

    In order to meet California’s GHG reduction goals, the state has adopted policies that discourage road expansion and its concomitant VMT increases. SB 743, passed in 2013, required agencies to use VMT as a metric for analyzing transportation impacts of new projects after July 1, 2020 instead of Level of Service (LOS). Put another way, this bill made reducing overall motor vehicle use the goal of state policy rather than short-term reductions in road congestion. The California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA)’s Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure (CAPTI), adopted in 2021, establishes policy that “projects should generally aim to reduce vehicle miles traveled” and counsels agencies that “when addressing congestion, consider alternatives to highway capacity expansion such as providing multimodal options in the corridor, employing pricing strategies, and using technology to optimize operations.” However, Caltrans appears to be disregarding the state’s new policy framework with multiple projects including Yolo 80.

    A certain amount of congestion isn’t bad in that it puts realistic constraints on the public’s behavior. However, if congestion is deemed to be a problem beyond that point, the academic and professional literature shows that pricing, better land use planning, and other demand management solutions (e.g. working with large employers to promote vanpools and transit use) are the best strategies. But Caltrans never considered those alternatives in the Yolo 80 case. It clearly wanted to widen the freeway from the start, and indeed appears to have illegally begun widening I-80 east of the Mace intersection and west of the I-50 split in early Fall 2023 well before the current environmental review was completed. This action  shows a high level of disregard for CEQA/NEPA processes, and we ask Caltrans to suspend construction activities on Yolo 80 until environmental review is completed and the environmental document certified.

    The Yolo 80 DEIR has a great many deficiencies which require revising and recirculating the document. These include the following:

    (more…)

  • Can Local Caltrans Office be Trusted on DEIR’s Traffic-GHG Forecasts?

    By Alan Hirsch, YoloTD

    As you read this, the lengthy draft Environment Impact Report (EIR) for the widening of I-80 has been released for public review (see I-80 Widening draft EIR now available). It was first promised in early 2021.

    Readers should be warned not to take its results as truth, but rather as a forecast that has not been peer reviewed. The goal of public review of an EIR is to correct the deficiencies before the final document is completed and a decision to approve the project is made. If done accurately, the conclusions should inform government decision makers if the $330 million project‘s benefits outweigh the impacts.

    These background facts and past Davis Enterprise reporting might be useful as you read the draft EIR:

    (more…)

  • I-80 Widening draft EIR now available

    (From press release) I-80 Yolo Widening project’s draft environmental documents, including the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), are now available for public comment. This project is to improve mobility in the I-80 corridor and this environmental study compares cost/benefits of alternatives, primarily focused on adding 16 miles of freeway lanes in each direction between Dixon and the 50-80 split.

    The draft environmental documents are available for review through the State’s CEQA Clearinghouse here: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2021060117/4

    The public is encouraged to comment on the scope, alternatives (were enough considered?), assumptions, and methods of the analysis as described in these draft study documents. For example, were traffic noise and localized air pollution addressed and mitigated? Were impacts appropriately described and effectively mitigated? These draft documents include the first Caltrans EIR in Northern California that must conform to new state law SB743 (Steinberg). This new law requires environmental impact studies to focus on the climate impact described as the GHG from the changes in vehicle miles traveled. Traffic congestion is no longer considered an important factor in the environmental analysis.

    The draft documents will also be posted on the Caltrans “Yolo80 Improvements” webpage: https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-projects/d3-i80-corridor-improvements. Yolo Transportation District (YoloTD) will post a link as well: www.YoloTD.org.

    (more…)

  • Sign on to support greater oversight of Caltrans

    (From press release) CalBike, along with over 100 climate, mobility, and transportation justice nonprofits, signed a letter to Governor Gavin Newsom requesting greater oversight of Caltrans. The letter, spearheaded by NextGen California, made three specific requests:

    • An external audit of the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) to ensure that funds aren’t being illegally used to widen roads.
    • A third-party investigation of allegations by former Caltrans Deputy Director Jeanie Ward-Waller. Specifically, Ward-Waller said Caltrans District 3 is widening a freeway in what was supposed to be a repaving project. The letter requests an investigation of all Caltrans districts to ensure none are using funds for unauthorized road expansion.
    • A moratorium on all road and interchange expansions until the investigations are completed.

    Click on link to read the full letter and add your name

    https://www.calbike.org/calbike-joins-60-organizations-urging-more-oversight-of-caltrans/#Caltranspetitioncaltrans/#Caltranspetition

  • I-80 Whistleblower: Caltrans Steamrolls Eviro-Laws to Widen Freeways

    Caltrrans whistleblower Jeanie ward-waller

    Jeanie Ward-Waller, former Caltrans deputy director of Planning and Mode Development until she noted likely environmental violation on I-80 project

     

    By Alan Hirsch, YoloMobility

    News of a high-level Caltrans whistleblower hit the national media in recent weeks with stories in the Sacramento Bee, LA Times and Politico. But when you meet former Caltrans Deputy Director of Planning and Modal programs Jeanie Ward-Waller, you learn that she was forced out of Caltrans and into a public whistleblowing role by just one action.

    She spoke via Zoom at a meeting of the Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) on Thursday 10/19. In her opening remarks she said:

    • She misses her colleagues of six years who are doing good work to evolve Caltrans.
    • “We need good people in government.”
    • Caltrans has an important role in maintaining our existing highways.
    • Achieving a well-functioning transportation system is her life’s work and she misses being engaged.

    She said her demotion and effective firing were a total surprise. Her story of how it happened started when she noted that Caltrans District 3 seemed to have misappropriated extra funds from a pavement rehab project to rebuild shoulders in a wider and more expensive way so that they could be easily converted to extra lanes. Technically it would not count as widening until the stripes for these lanes are painted. Widening the freeway had not been approved by elected officials or undergone the required public and environmental review process.  One thing she didn’t mention: the amount of misappropriated funds in question is likely on the order of tens of millions dollars — part of the $240 million I-80 Yolo Causeway pavement rehab project, which is separate from the I-80 widening project.

    (more…)

  • Did Caltrans Piece-Meal Plan for I-80 corridor violate CEQA, ignore Davis impacts? 

    Caltrans failure to do corridor wide EIR negated transit, wastes billions and did not call out cut thru impacts

    Piecemealing Map I-80 corridor

     by Alan Hirsch, Yolo Mobility  

    Transit works best as a network- you won’t get transit ridership if you just build just 1 or 5 miles of light rail, or upgrade just a few miles of Amtrak to 100mph service. You need to have interconnected regional system, especially with our dispersed land use patterns.  

    Below is a Caltrans map from the long-hidden corridor plan, the “I-80  CMCP” shows the many widenings has planned or started in the  I-80 Corridor. These types of corridor plans, first required by SB1 (2017) reveal for the first time “piece-mealing” of freeway widening, I.E., breaking a corridor widening into  many small separate projects.   Each separate project is studied separately thru alternative analysis/EIR process so to assure transit alternative are small stand-and never pencil. And many of  project are so small they don’t even require at EIR.   

    If fact, this is why piece-mealing is a violation of California Environmental Law. It has been cited by many others including a recent hi level whistleblower as how Caltrans systematically gets around environmental laws designed to address climate change.  

    The corridor plan for I-80 (I-80 CMCP) was not released to public on Caltrans website until May of 2023, over 9 months after the Yolo80 EIR alternative were selected. In fact, this corridor plan did compare transit  vs highway alternatives. It concluded upgrading the Capitol Corridor Rail service to 100 MPH is 15x more cost effective to move people than the entire bundle of freeway widening shown on map (see Vanguard article).  

    With many of the widening construction already are underway, one can wonder how many billions (with a B) of dollars in taxpayer money are being poorly spend because of this setup by Caltrans to preordain a result ? What sort of set back does this represent on meeting the state climate plan that required us to reduce driving and well as shift to electric cars to reduce our GHG’s. 

    One can also note the Yolo causeway “bottle neck” and cut thru traffic in Davis did not just happen:  it was created by Caltrans by widening freeway to the west and it impact on Davis section of I-80  s shown clearly in  traffic studies.   

    As for collaboration with communities in the developing corridor plans, a public record request of Yolobus/Yolo TD found no records in its files it was involved in developing the plan, and Caltrans has never presented the final or preliminary report or involved YoloTD board or Davis City or its Commissions in its development in a substantive way. Yet Caltrans lists these entities, as well as citizens groups like Bike Davis as involved with its development. Caltrans neglect of considering community impact is shown by Caltrans failure to list “reduce cut thru traffic” as a goal/purpose/need for their proposed Causeway widening on its project website. 

    SAVE THE DATE: A Freeway Teach-In Nov 8th  

    Davis Futures Forum on the Future of the I-80 Corridor 

    Wed, Nov 8th 7:00-8:30  Davis Community Church Fellowship Hall, 412 C street 

    I-80 traffic congestion is frustrating even the most patient among us! The Caltrans proposed solution has been to increase the number of traffic lanes, however many Davis citizens have expressed strong opposition noting the need for transportation alternatives. Further, a high level Caltrans executive has accused her peers of violating environmental laws by underestimating the negative impacts of the proposal. And research at the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies shows that attempts to address congestion by adding lanes only works for a short time before the lanes are filled again by new drivers. 

    What is the solution? The public is invited to explore this question at a Davis Futures Forum talk and panel discussion. The keynote speaker is Professor Susan Handy, the renowned head of the National Center for Sustainable Development. Her presentation will be followed by a diverse response panel who will give us their thoughts about how best to move forward. The event will be held Wednesday, Nov 8th at 7pm in at the Davis Community Church. Please sign up in advance and you will receive advance material, a link to the real-time zoom and YouTube recording of the teach-in. 

  • Caltrans’ data shows 100mph rail upgrade 15x more cost-effective than road widening

    Study: Average speed difference trivial if toll lanes added; HOV lanes don’t work.

    1 SEGMENT WIDENING

    By Alan Hirsch, Yolo Mobility 

    If you read deeply and critically into Caltrans documents, you will often find a number of things  acknowledged- inconvenient truth not always shared with elected officials.

     City and County elected officials rely on agency staff to give honest and complete presentation of objective findings.  However, the reality is elected official are very vulnerable if an agency’s staff is committed to pursue a pre-ordained solution. Staff can bending their analysis or make strategic omissions of information in their presentation. These are rarely caught by elected official who don’t have time to read, much less understand the reports.

    Then it’s up a rare whistleblower and or nerdy gadflies to protect the public interest by catching this, and making public comments to elected who otherwise don’t have time to read everything.

    But in the end, it up courageous electeds, who are willing to both listen to the outsiders, and are then open to changing their minds, if the agency solution is be questioned if its pre-ordained solution is in the public good.

    This manipulation of data  does come from all Government agencies, or even most, but this Machiavellian approach to public policy can hard backed  into  the culture of some.

    (more…)

  • Response to I-80 update piece by Alan Hirsch

    Note: The following email was sent to the Davisite, asking for a correction to Alan Hirsch's recent articles.  As the email contains some misunderstandings about the nature of the Davisite, a new article has been written that tries to correct these misunderstandings and other common misconceptions – see More about the Davisite.  Just as with Alan Hirsch's articles and with any other article on the Davisite, the volunteers who operate this blog do not vouch for the correctness of what is written below.

    The Davisite has recently posted a series of guest-authored pieces by Alan Hirsch about the Yolo 80 Managed Lanes project containing a pattern of significant inaccuracies, potentially causing confusion about the project among the general population. Providing a forum for vigorous policy debate is an important role of blog-based local media, however, informal media should aspire to post accurate information, even from guest authors.

    As Caltrans’ partner on the Yolo 80 Managed Lanes project, the Yolo Transportation District (YoloTD) responds to two inaccuracies in Mr. Hirsch's most recent July 24, 2023 article posting titled, "I-80 update: Caltrans proposes cutting mitigation for Phase I".

                   Article Title and Article List Item #1: Mr. Hirsch's title “I-80 update: Caltrans proposes cutting mitigation for Phase I” is inaccurate. Caltrans has not proposed in any way to cut mitigation for Phase 1 of the Yolo 80 Managed Lanes project. Any version of the project that moves forward will be subject to CEQA. The Draft Environmental Impact Report has not yet been released, and any speculation about its contents is just that — speculation. Mr. Hirsch has speculated that funding will not be available for mitigation, which is an opinion, not a fact.

                   Article List Item #2: YoloTD's statement that an HOV lane would be congested on day 1 requires additional background. The comment refers to "peak" hours at bottleneck locations under a specific HOV2+ scenario where high-occupancy vehicles with two or more people (HOV2+) are allowed access to the lane, which is one of several scenarios that could advance. Other scenarios with higher occupancy requirements could result in lower congestion levels on the new lanes.

    (more…)

  • I-80 update: Caltrans proposes cutting mitigation for Phase I

    Image001 1525

    by Alan Hirsch

    1. At the Yolo Transportation District (YoloTD) board meeting 7/17, it was shared that Caltrans is considering a plan to save the I-80 widening project by trimming it back from $210m to the $86 mil fed funds they have so they can spend them before the funds time out: Their plan would be to widen a few miles of the freeway as HOV without adding tolling infrastructure.  i.e., no source of revenue for more transit or other mitigations. This is the core project Caltrans assumably was after anyway as they originally had Congress ear mark the $86m in grant money to only be used for an untolled  HOV lane.  Assumably full tolling and mitigation would be implemented when and if money for a now larger Phase II is found sometime in the future.
    2. YoloTD staff using Caltrans numbers have said even a complete 17mile long HOV lane would be congested day 1. Arguing now for a widening just a short section blows apart any logic that Caltrans want to fix a “bottle neck”.
    3. Three of the five YoloTD members objected to Caltrans toll-less plan for the new lane expressing concern they want money to spend locally. Board member Jesse Loren of the Winter Council was very concerned about not having toll lane revenue funds for a social equity program- assumably a program needed to mitigation of inequity of having that self-same toll lane. At risk for Davis is the Micro transit service- i.e.  93% subsidy required for $40/trip service as well as financial help the developer of the Nishe project and downtown Davis.
    4. Most Board members asked how much widening they can buy after inflation impact cutting the buying power of the money. Lucas Frerichs raise a question if a CEQA environmental lawsuit might slow or stop the project (response: likely not if EIR is certified by Caltrans but it could retroactively affect the mitigation program and tolling policy.)
    5. The board raised no question about staff’s Plan B other that cuttings scope: i.e. fund the phase I  short fall created when California Transportation Commission failed to fund on 6/26. YoloTD Staff report noted they were considering local Muni-bond or obtaining Federal FHWA Loan to be guaranteed locally. YoloTD staff said this is still being explored but the time frame is challenging.(see previous Vanguard article)
    6. Silence continues on the Climate Change Elephants in the Room: In discussions by YoloTD Board that night, the terms Climate Change,  VMT, GHG or induced demand were not used in reference to-I-80 project.  There was no acknowledgement or response to letters by Professor Stephen Wheeler, signed by 20 Davis resident on climate change asking for reopen EIR with transit alternatives or a similar letter by Professor John Johnson of CSUS.
    7. No one directly acknowledge or publicly responded to powerful letter from head of National Center for Sustainable Transportation Professor Susan Handy that said based on decades of studies the I-80 extra lane- even if tolled — won’t fix congestion but will hurt the environment. This letter was privately shared with the board but not shared with the public (see coming Vanguard article that will reprint it)
    8. YoloTD chair Tom Stallard gave a statement “for the record” He references generic “letters” which might include that from Wheeler and Handy.  Not bothering to reference any science to studies, he that the board need to be realistic and simply widen the freeway as this would fix congestion.  He used examples of his grandchildren’s need to get to piano lesson and sporting event as evidence of important needs that need be addressed. His argument is a tour de force of how common sense should overrule science out of the university. No member of board contradicted his statements as chair. Tom Stallard is one of the richest men in Yolo County having given over $50,000 to the Mondavi Center, so a managed toll lane that never congests would work well for his family to avoid congestion.
    9. Josh Chapman, the Davis Council rep failed to show.  Davis City manager/council does not seem to have appointed an alternate-to YoloTD unlike other JPB bodies the city is a party to.
    10. -I 80 Draft EIR release will again be delayed again to the end of August per Caltrans statement at YoloTD meeting. Caltrans originally scheduled the DEIR to be release in January of 2023. Caltrans has no email list to inform stakeholder of delays and does not update such information on the project’s website, so continue to read the Vanguard or Davisite to keep informed.

    The Meeting: Video of July 17, 2023 board meeting is at  https://youtu.be/O7odnLgxuF4  The I-80 agenda item begins at 33 minutes in. Tom Stallard’s statement that effectively denies university science of “induced demand” is at about 1:06

     

  • Letter to Yolo County Transportation District concerning adding a lane to I-80

    July 14, 2023

    Board of Directors
    Yolo County Transportation District 350 Industrial Way
    Woodland, CA 95776

    Dear YCTD Directors:

    We write to express our concern about Caltrans’ plans to add a lane to Interstate 80 between Dixon and Sacramento, referred to as the “Yolo 80 Managed Lanes Project.” Such freeway capacity expansion will raise greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) in the I-80 corridor while inducing motor-vehicle-dependent suburban sprawl. It is contrary to GHG-reduction goals set by the State of California, the Sacramento region, Yolo County, and many local cities. Any congestion relief will be short-lived due to induced demand, as shown by many past freeway expansion projects.

    At your meeting on July 17, 2023, we request that you ask Caltrans to study additional options for this project that would substantially improve transit, keep freeway capacity within current limits, stabilize or reduce VMT, reduce GHGs and local air pollution, and improve equity.

    Such options might include

    (more…)