Court Stops Highway 50 Expansion

Judge Frawley today released his order in the NAST/ECOS lawsuit challenging the adequacy of Caltrans' environmental review of the proposed Highway 50 expansion. The short story is that we won. Here's a quote from the soon-to-be-distributed press release:

Judge Timothy M. Frawley of the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, issued a ruling halting the progress of CalTrans’ plan to widen Highway 50 between Sunrise and Watt Avenues. Neighbors Advocating Sustainable Transportation (NAST) and the Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) filed the suit because CalTrans’ analysis of the project’s air pollution and climate change impacts was inadequate, and the project did not consider options that did not involve widening the freeway. The ruling was issued on July 15th. The lawsuit was originally filed in June of 2007.

Among other findings, Judge Frawley found that CalTrans failed to:

Complete an analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and disclose the air quality impacts associated with the traffic increase.

Consider a reasonable range of potential alternatives, including the feasibility of a transit only alternative as way of meeting the project objectives.

Adequately address the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the project.

The entire text of the judge's order is available here. I'll post the press release as soon as it is ready.


Thanks to everyone who provided logistical, financial, and moral support over the past year. This victory is a triumph for the transparent and thorough public process that CEQA demands. We look forward to a more thorough and honest debate about the value of more freeway lanes in the Sacramento region. Given what's happened to gas prices in the past year, that debate should be very interesting!


Update: Here is the press release.

NAST Starts Hwy 50 Lawsuit Fund

Neighbors Advocating Sustainable Transportation (NAST) has begun collecting funds for a CEQA lawsuit to challenge the environmental impact report done by Caltrans for its Highway 50 expansion project. While the group continues to discuss how to best use its resources to forcefully advocate for sustainable, neighborhood-friendly transportation, they have decided that they need to raise money now because of the short statute of limitations on CEQA cases.

I've posted the email message seeking support for the legal fund here, on the NAST website.

HOV lanes & Toll lanes

SABA's Walt Seifert was kind enough to send along a link to this opinion article by Heather MacDonald in today's L.A. Times:

CALTRANS' crusade to add more carpool lanes to Southern California freeways continues unabated; too bad the department doesn't know how many real carpools use them. Unless the department can show that the high-occupancy-vehicle lanes are actually reducing the number of cars on the road, its multibillion-dollar plan to add hundreds of miles of new HOV capacity around Los Angeles will be a colossal waste of taxpayers' money.

The article goes on to point out that HOV lanes have a "negligible" effect on true carpooling rates, once you account for all the freeloaders who incidentally qualify as 'carpools'-- limos with passengers, parents transporting children, friends with a common destination who would have been riding together anyway, etc.

MacDonald's proposed solution is toll lanes. Unlike so-called carpool lanes, the premise of a toll lane is that everyone who uses the lane pays. Bona fide, employer-sponsored carpools could be exempted, but families and other 'circumstantial carpools' would have to pay just like everyone else. And single-occupancy cars could use the lane as well, if they're willing to pay to do so.

MacDonald's solution seems geared at preventing further public subsidies for automobile commuters. That's a laudible goal. But she doesn't directly address the question of whether a toll lane would more effectively encourage carpooling, thereby reducing the number of vehicles and the pollution they cause.

Then, of course, there's the question of whether a toll lane would be an equitable transportation solution, or whether it would simply allow a free pass, for those who can afford it, out of one of the most bothersome aspects of life in cities designed around the automobile.

Caltrans Approves Highway 50 expansion

On June 25, Caltrans filed its Notice of Determination indicating that it had completed environmental review of the proposed Highway 50 expansion and approved the project. This is the so-called "bus/carpool lane" project that would increase the freeway's carrying capacity by 20 to 25 per cent. By approving the project, Caltrans started the 30-day clock for legal challenges to the project's environmental impact report (EIR).

Two days later, Caltrans got around to notifying the public who had commented on the project that the Final EIR had been released. By delaying public notification, they foreshortened the effective window of opportunity for citizens to file suit. Gotta love our intrepid public servants' deep commitment to transparent public process...

News flash!

Does this item surprise anybody?

The Federal Highway Administration has notified the state its carpool lanes are too slow – slower than an average of 45 miles an hour during peak periods. The lanes have been under the agency’s oversight since the state started allowing solo hybrid drivers to use them.

The short news byte also adds a delicious bit of dramatic irony when the Caltrans spokesperson notes, with a hint of incredulity, the impact of continued highway expansion in a growing region:

“Vehicle miles traveled actually increases faster than population growth,so as we continue to get more people driving on our highways, that’s obviously going to impact the congestion.”

Obviously. Obviously and inevitably, when you build a transportation system that facilitates continued use of the automobile and gives people few alternative choices.

It's more than a little disingenuous for Caltrans to imply that population growth alone drives the increase in VMT. The rate of increase is exacerbated if we continue to build freeways that induce traffic demand, rather than pursuing strategies that reduce both congestion and traffic.

ECOS Comments on DEIR for I-80 Expansion

Better late than never... Here is an electronic copy of the comments that ECOS submitted on the Draft Environmental Impact Report released by CalTrans for its I-80 Expansion project (a so-called bus/carpool lane project).

The DEIR is available on the CalTrans website here.

Ideals and Actions

It's hard not to be impressed with the lofty goals in SACOG's MTP, the long-term transportation plan for the Sacramento region. It includes such laudible goals as:

3. AIR QUALITY

Develop a transportation system and related strategies that contribute to achieving healthy air in the region...

9. HEALTH AND SAFETY

Improve the health of our residents by developing systems that would encourage walking and biking, and improve the safety and security of people on all modes in all areas...

10. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Develop the transportation system to promote and enhance environmental quality for present and future generations.

These principles sound like the foundation for a progressive, transit-oriented transportation plan that will move us away from relying on automobiles, right?

Think again!

Too often, the individual projects funded by the ostensibly progressive MTP are the same old solution to our transportation woes-- they spend our money to build roads and encourage still more automobile traffic. This approach does nothing to improve our air quality, ensure our health and safety, or promote environmental solution. On the contrary, continued expenditures on projects to increase highway capacity promote increased traffic and exacerbate the environmental woes that come with reliance on the automobile.

Take, for example, Caltrans' current proposal to expand Interstate 80 by adding a lane-- a so-called "bus/carpool lane." Caltrans has recently admitted that their "bus/carpool lanes" increase traffic rather than promoting sustainability, health or improving air quality. Check out the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed expansion of I-80. The project would add a "bus/carpool lane" to the freeway with the objective of encouraging carpooling and decreasing congestion. It sounds good, until you comb through Caltrans' own environmental impact studies. Buried deep in the DEIR is the admission that the addition of a "bus/carpool lane" to the freeway will increase traffic along I-80 in the eastbound direction during rush hour by 13% (compared to the 'no-build' alternative). That means 13% more vehicles on the freeway, solely as a result of the induced demand that results from freeway expansion.

This fact-- one of the most important impacts of the proposed expansion-- barely merits mention in Caltrans' DEIR. You have to look closely at p. 43 in Chapter 2 of the DEIR to notice that the additional lane will increase eastbound traffic during rush hour from 53,000 vehicles to 60,000 vehicles. That's a major increase in traffic, and it will result in important environmental impacts. Still, Caltrans apparently doesn't think a 13% increase in traffic is "significant."

What part of this project protects air quality, community health and safety or sustainability, as the MTP promises?

SACOG's MTP, like many planning documents developed through political processes, fails to follow through on the laudable goals it sets for itself. We're promised better air quality, better health, and a more sustainable system. What we get, when all is said and done, is more cars. It's easy to see why people are cynical about politics.