Category: Uncategorized

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

Hiroshima_aftermath – Metaphor for DISC II By U.S. Navy Public Affairs Resources Website – http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/images/historical/hiroshima.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=91928

Today at the monthly meeting of the Bicycle Transportation and Street Safe…

What?

Yes, the Staff of the City of Davis again botched the name of the "bicycling commission", formally the "Bicycling, Transportation and Street Safety Commission" in L'il Bastard Son of DISC I, also known as DISC II.

Just a simple typo? Yes, the name makes no grammatical sense. When I was on the Commission I tried to change it. No success. Anyway, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Staff didn't notice the repeated error in the Staff Report for DISC II.

Whatever? OK, here's the summary of DISC II in regards to transportation:

They promise:

• To contribute to a grade-separated crossing of Mace.
• To hire a Transportation Demand Manager, who will solve transportation stuff in the future
• To contribute money for stuff, in the future, like "carpool lanes" (sic*) on I-80 as part of the Multi-Million Dollar Unknown Lanes Project of Caltrans District 3.

The project is placed directly on I-80: When there's no congestion, which is still much of the time, it will take 15-20 minutes door-to-door from DISC II to much of UC Davis campus, West Sacramento, and so on. Downtown. It simply has no competition.

Certainly not from cycling! The planned residential area of DISC II is simply so far cycling-wise from everything that it should have been rejected by staff. There is no connectivity promised to South Davis, including Nugget and some nice restaurants etc around it. (Seriously, does anyone from Nugget HQ ride to South Davis Nugget by bike? Ha!!) Modifications to the Mace over-crossing of the Union Pacific ROW and I-80 to make it cycling-friendly (or better) and pedestrian-tolerant are absolutely necessary even without DISC II, and very expensive, and DISC II's leaders and Staff are planning nothing about it.

Is anyone even going to walk to Target? Perhaps kids will ride bikes to schools in East Davis, because they have no other choice aside from the parental automobile ferry.

Sure, some shuttles and so forth are promised, there's that Park & Ride, people without fare-free parking or cheap parking at their destination might take transit.

DISC II is planned to impact Roads 32A and B as a way to avoid Mace, even as right now the City and County are trying to create a safe route on 32A to the Bypass for people riding bikes.

DISC can't promise anything concrete, e.g. only a study on Mace. But then it will generate enough tax revenue many years from now? For now – and we need improvements now – the City couldn't even get the developers of the project to pay for removal and replacement of the slip lanes on Mace and Alhambra. Similar for the extended stay hotel on Mace and 2nd. And in South Davis, only the part of Chiles directly fronting the new hotel has been fully re-paved. The differential in illumination is so great that after passing the hotel one can barely see the road.

For over four years the City's  had a very greasy grip on the handlebars of our collective bicycle: There's been no senior civil engineer for transportation for all of that time. During the summer the City Council finally re-authorized a new budget for this position, and finally an executive search firm will be tasked to find someone. It's unlikely they will start before spring, too late to weigh in on DISC II, five years since the last one left.

Last time DISC I came to the BTSSC I dissented on support of a list of recommendations; I was on the sub-committee that developed what turned into that. In the end I knew that e.g. "lipstick on a pig" was too weak a metaphor for the nonsense of DISC I. It's the same for DISC II.

* Caltrans doesn't know what kind of extra lane it will be.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-12-09/people-flee-from-a-burning-christmas-tree-in/233792?nw=0

I identify as culturally Jewish. I lived in Prague for many years. Most know that Jews and Jewish culture were largely erased from what's now the Czech capital and much of central and eastern Europe from the 1930's through the 1980's.

In Prague and all over Czechia, "Christmas" as such has various traditions, most of which are similar to those in the USA. One thing which was quite unusual was the public selling of carp in public squares or similar areas. In the days up to Xmas, many would buy them and bring them home and put them in their bathtub for a few days before killing and eating them; others – probably more – had them bludgeoned to death in the street before bringing them home.

It was not pleasant to watch the second example; many Czechs would argue that fish had a very undeveloped nerve system and wouldn't feel much, and in any case it was not worse that simply buying meat at the market.

I don't like cooked carp. However, if this was a Davis tradition and E St Plaza was filled with tanks of water and carp and so on, I would still not get offended, more specifically to take special offense because I am Jewish (Jews were never deported from Davis, so that element is not an issue!).

What IS deeply offensive however, in Downtown Davis, is the "Holiday Tree". For starters, it's clear that this name for a winter pagan symbol for Christmas came about a couple decades ago because the State is not supposed to be involved in Religion. So it's thought that "Christmas Tree" is inappropriate. In schools there is education about different holidays that happen at different times of the year, though official holidays are another thing!

The deeper problem is the second issue, which is somehow Hanukkah, the Jewish "festival of lights" is only coincidentally around Xmas, and has no connection to it, at least historically (it's more consumerist in the USA, likely because of its proximity to the western Christian holiday – Eastern Christians observe it some weeks later, they use a different calendar – so there is a bit of a relationship, fine… though for myself and some other Jews it's a more modest affair – and while about a "miracle", it's not a religious holiday.)

The deepest problem is that the evening event traditionally connected with the Holiday Tree in Davis has almost zero Jewish anything. There's lots of Santa, songs and so on – some of which is not happening this year. Even the menorah lighting in Davis this year happened at the Cannery – in Prague, Chabad does it in one of many square in the city center. So if you're gonna call it a Holiday Tree – make it about everything happening around now – Diwali was not so long ago, tonight is the fifth night of Hanukkah, Xmas isn't for more than three weeks, then there's Gregorian New Year (like "Chinese New Year", though it's really the East Asian Lunar New Year…). There's also Winter Solstice – in the northern hemisphere -  obviously already connected with Christmas, but I think deserving distinction. One idea – to justify the felling and display of another tree in – or connected with Davis politics – is to make it truly inclusive and supporting of an inclusive event. But when there's no real connection between a holiday and another, the celebrations should be independent.

So as a Jew I am happy to celebrate Western Christmas with my fellow Christian, Christianish or other non-Jews. After Gregorian New Year, please take down the "Holiday Tree". Permanently. Next year, please put up a "Christmas Tree" in Downtown Davis.

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.