The widening of I-80 works against California’s climate goals | Opinion

If we want to know why our state’s transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions have risen since the early 2010s, a good place to look is Caltrans. The agency has long been fixated on widening roads and creating “induced demand” which has led to more driving. Currently, this cycle continues through the agency’s questionable efforts to create additional lanes on the I-80 Yolo Bypass causeway leading into Sacramento. And recently, a high-level administrator was demoted after attempting to stop such actions.

The Caltrans model for freeway building and expansion began in the 1950’s when federal dollars for these projects became available. By the late 20th Century, many observers realized that expanding roads was creating new problems. By facilitating suburban sprawl and motor vehicle dependency, California’s road-building has led to air pollution and congestion. The quality of life consequences of our vehicle dependency are most severe in disadvantaged communities.

Now, with climate change, the imperative is to emit less. It takes a new and completely different mindset for transportation planning. But one of the state’s most important transportation institutions remains dangerously stuck in the past.

Opinion

California leaders have sought to move state transportation policy in the right direction. Senate Bill 743, for example, was introduced in 2013 by then-Senator Darrell Steinberg. According to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, SB 743 required agencies to evaluate transportation projects by new metrics that promote less driving and not more. Recently, the California State Transportation Agency, which oversees Caltrans, has sought to codify the new approach within its 2021 Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure. The agency is advancing a new and important principle that “projects should generally aim to reduce vehicle miles traveled … 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.”

Meanwhile, Caltrans continues to widen highways, employing various strategies to slip road expansions under the public’s radar. One strategy has been to break large projects into small pieces. That makes it harder to determine whether the new projects will worsen air pollution and make climate change worse.

Another strategy has been to promote freeway expansions by using phrases like “high occupancy lanes” or “managed lanes” that give the impression that they will be good for the environment when they are really not. This practice is called “greenwashing,” which Merriam-Webster defines as, “making a product, policy (or) activity ... appear to be more environmentally friendly or less environmentally damaging than it really is.”

In August, Jeanie Ward-Waller, Caltrans’ deputy director of planning and modal programs, told agency officials that she would file a whistle-blower complaint about several practices Caltrans is using to expand the I-80 causeway west of Sacramento under the guise of “pavement rehabilitation” and “managed lanes,” as reported by Politico. The Los Angeles Times reported that she was placed on an informal leave and “offered a lesser job.”

The I-80 Yolo County causeway functions as the Bay Bridge does for San Francisco, providing the only way into Sacramento from the west. Expanding this freeway could add 8,000 to 12,000 cars a day to Sacramento’s freeways and roads, particularly at rush hour. The result would be more regional congestion — and further excuses for Caltrans to widen roads.

Environmental review for the “Yolo 80 Corridor Improvement Project” has not yet been completed, so any work toward road widening at this stage is questionable for that reason as well. The review has major problems. Of the eight alternatives Caltrans is studying, six involve adding a lane. A seventh “No Build” alternative is required by law, and an eighth proposes re-striping an existing travel lane for high-occupancy vehicles — a step unlikely to make a significant difference in terms of congestion or other goals.

Under the aforementioned State Climate Plan for Transportation Investment, Caltrans should be studying other options, including improved transit service in the corridor (rail and bus) and congestion pricing. Under the latter concept, tolls on the I-80 causeway would help reduce congestion, and the resulting funds could be spent on transit and/or affordable housing near jobs in the I-80 corridor, both of which would further reduce driving. Low-income drivers could benefit from pricing adjustments and improved transit options.

The era of freeway-building — which Caltrans exemplifies — must end. But the agency still hasn’t gotten the memo, and so undercuts California’s climate goals. A major reorganization is needed to bring the agency into the 21st century.

A moratorium on highway widening is appropriate until the Legislature and governor get an external audit of Caltrans. If state and local leaders are serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, they need to take such actions.

Stephen M. Wheeler is a professor of urban planning and design at UC Davis. Barbara Leary is a climate and transportation activist. Alan Hirsch, a member of Yolo Mobility, also contributed to this piece.