Davis City Council Meeting – February 7, 2024: G Street Activation, League Report, and Consent Items
Davis City Council Meeting – February 7, 2024
Note: The agenda and transcript identify the meeting date as February 6, 2024, but the summary instruction specifies February 7, 2024. This summary uses the instructed date while acknowledging the discrepancy.
The Davis City Council met on the evening of February 7, 2024, at Community Chambers, 23 Russell Boulevard. Mayor Josh Chapman presided with all council members present (Vice Mayor Bapu Vaitla, Will Arnold, Donna Neville, Gloria Partida). The meeting included a presentation from the League of Women Voters, an update on the G Street Activation project with community engagement results, and approval of a consent calendar. Public comments focused on the recent commission reorganization proposal and expressed support or concerns about various commission structures. The council also received updates on storm damage and the Tonghai Huin awards.
Consent Calendar
- Approved unanimously (5-0) the following items without discussion:
- Agreement with Downtown Streets Team to operate the Daytime Respite Homeless Navigation Center through June 2026.
- Task Order No. 5 for 2023/24 Pavement Rehabilitation design and construction support services with Nichols Consulting Engineers.
- Amendment No. 3 to Task Order No. 4 for Wastewater Treatment Plant Biofilter installation with West Yost Associates.
- Subdivision Committee Minutes of November 20, 2023 (informational).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Commission Reorganization (from previous meeting): Multiple speakers addressed the proposed restructuring of city commissions, a topic discussed at the prior council meeting.
- Alan Hirsch (Davis Lorax) argued that agenda control suppresses important topics like I-80 discussions and Black Lives Matter, and warned of diminished commission input.
- Patrick Huber (Open Space and Habitat Commission) supported the reorganization, calling the process thoughtful and inclusive, and urged embracing the opportunity for the general plan update.
- Kyle Johnson and Shivi (ASUCD legislative directors) urged council to add an ex-officio student position to the newly created Affordable Housing Commission, noting that about 60% of UC Davis students rely on off-campus housing.
- Joshua Smith (UC Davis student) spoke about difficulty finding affordable housing and requested student representation on the housing commission.
- Greg (Planning Commission chair, speaking personally) strongly supported the subcommittee recommendations, stating that city advisory commissions should be adjusted to reflect evolving needs.
- Alan Miller performed a musical commentary defending the existing commissions.
- Carol Hillhouse (West Davis tree committee chair) supported the mergers, saying they bring together experts for efficient problem-solving and align with the general plan.
- Lorenzo Christoph (Utilities Commission, speaking personally) criticized the process as disrespectful to commissioners and urged council to hold public sessions, take criticism seriously, and build collaborative relationships before moving forward.
- Elaine RobertsMester argued that council’s failure to communicate what information it wants from commissions is council’s fault, and that treating commissions with contempt could endanger a future tax hike.
- Catherine Brinkley supported streamlining commissions and creating an environmental justice commission ahead of the general plan update.
- Jonathan London (UC Davis professor) supported the reorganization’s intention but urged additional consultation, particularly supporting a climate and environmental justice committee.
- Colin Walsh (Tree Commission vice chair, speaking personally) expressed concern about merging commissions without consultation and urged council to engage with commissioners.
- Mark Housing (personal capacity) supported aligning commissions with state-mandated general plan elements to prepare for climate, housing, and transportation challenges.
- G Street Activation:
- Alan Hirsch criticized the plan for not mentioning trees and argued that the tree commission is needed to advocate for trees.
- Gray Crawford (personal) supported the space but cautioned against narrowing Third to Fifth Street parking, which could harm cyclist safety.
- Alan Miller said the problem is closing G Street to cars, causing traffic diversion, and suggested a design contest for any arch.
- Prerecorded comment: A speaker favored fixing road/sidewalk, adding brick layout, and insisted seating remain fully public, not reserved for businesses.
- Consent Calendar (prerecorded): Russell Tangren objected to the respite center contract as neither trivial nor properly on consent, and questioned spending on a service he believes the private sector already provides.
Discussion Items
- Item 4: League of Women Voters Presentation – “A Vision of Our Future in Davis”
Michelle Famula (League president) and Mary Joe Bryan (committee chair) presented results from a community survey of 932 residents and five focus groups. The project, conducted in 2021-2023, gathered input on the city’s general plan elements. Key findings: residents prioritize housing, land use, conservation, and transportation; they acknowledge need for increased density but want farmland preservation and open space; support economic development and a second research park; desire greywater and water storage mandatory in new housing; see Unitrans as an asset but underused; want stronger enforcement of traffic rules for cyclists; and are skeptical that parking fees would encourage local shopping. The report is informational. Council members thanked the League and noted the timing aligns with the upcoming general plan update process beginning February 20. - Item 5: G Street Activation Update
Ryan Chapman (Assistant PWET Director) presented community engagement results (over 200 in-person responses, 500 online) and three design concepts. Concept A (preferred by 70% of respondents) maximizes raised platforms (17.75 ft wide) with a 20-ft fire lane in the middle; Concept B reduces platform size. The “angular/geometric” layout was preferred by 56% for visual interest, but staff noted it is more expensive and harder to maintain. For design style, 41% chose “comfort and traditional” (wood, softer features). Amenities desired: outdoor seating, benches, tables, a small stage, and musical engagement. Parking: no clear consensus; staff recommended no changes between 3rd and 5th streets until after project completion, and restriping the South G lot from angle to perpendicular parking for safety. Staff also presented a cost options menu: raised platforms ($660k), fencing/planters ($125k), street construction items ($95k), decorative lighting ($115k), street furniture ($85k), totaling $1,080,000 against a $1,050,000 budget (from ARPA funds and $60k downtown amenities). Staff recommended proceeding with Concept A, comfortable/traditional design, and incorporating decorative lighting consistent with a downtown lighting survey. They also recommended initiating a Civic Arts mural and discussions with community organizations for entryway elements.
Key Outcomes
- G Street Activation Direction (Motion by Arnold, seconded by Neville; passed 5-0):
- Directed staff to proceed with final design using Concept A (narrower center corridor with raised platforms).
- Directed staff to incorporate the “comfortable and traditional” design style (wood, softer features) and use right-angled platforms rather than angular shapes, due to logistical and cost concerns.
- Directed staff to initiate development of a Civic Arts mural and identify funding.
- Directed staff to initiate discussions with community organizations for possible entryway elements (e.g., an arch, subject to funding and engineering feasibility).
- Approved staff’s parking recommendations: restripe South G lot from angle to perpendicular parking; no changes between 3rd and 5th streets now, with future evaluation after project completion.
- Added direction: staff to further explore ADA mid-block access points and integrate kid-friendly amenities (e.g., games painted on the ground, interactive art) in collaboration with Parks & Rec and Civic Arts; and to incorporate signage/directory kiosks at key entry points.
- Item 6: AB 1234 and Long Range Calendar – No reports or changes; council noted the goal-setting retreat is scheduled for Friday, February 9 at 1 p.m. at Vets.
- Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned in memory of Corky Brown, a longtime Davis resident, former planning commissioner, community resource officer, and teacher. Councilmember Arnold shared personal reflections.
Meeting Transcript
All right, good evening, everyone. Welcome to the February 6, 2024 meeting of the Davis City Council. I will note that it is 6 44 and all of my colleagues are here in present. I will note that we did have a closed session this evening and uh nothing reportable out of the closed session. And with that, I will move to approval of the agenda. So moved. Second. All right. We have a motion by Vice Mayor Vitless, second by Councilmember Arnold. Any other questions, comments on the agenda? All right. Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, abstain. Motion carries 5-0. All right, we are on to item number one A, City Manager brief announcements. Mike. Yeah, thank you very much. Uh Mayor Chapman, City Council. Good evening. Have a few updates for you this evening. One is uh on our storm events that we've been experiencing the last several days. Uh this week's storm is one of the top three most damaging singles day storms on record in terms of outage totals uh with PGE in our region and the PGE territory, uh, which we've seen some effects of that here locally, of course. Thankfully, uh gone would for relatively minor for Davis, but impacts nonetheless. Um the PGE uh outages uh haven't haven't seen outages like this since storms in 1995 and 2008, uh just for example. Um in the city of Davis, we have um uh we do have some customers that are still without power. I think we have eight a total of 18 customers uh in Davis uh still needing power restored. PGE is in what they refer to as their quote unquote make safe mode, which means that they uh isolate damaged areas, uh including uh down lines uh and down poles uh to help prevent injury uh due to live wires or infrastructure that poses a risk to failure. And then once those facilities are secured and safe, they come back and do the work to restore power to customers. Um I will say that uh PGE's approach also is one where they are approaching the largest outage areas first. And so the small outages of a few customers, or in our case, we have I think it's four locations with a total of 18 outages, total uh customers uh are likely to be at the latter end of their restoration activities. Um there is uh updated information on the PGE website, uh there uh PGNE.com, and there's an outage uh map, uh interactive map that they have that we recommend people go to for updates uh that they update uh periodically with restoration uh expected uh times for completion. Uh also with respect to the storms, we our crews have been busy at work. Uh there have been uh to date 53 work order requests to the city uh between uh February 5th and 6th here. Uh we have uh 11 down trees reported as of yesterday. So we're still doing tallies of of the damage. Uh we have uh other work orders pertaining to debris that's uh been blown down uh in pathways and in parks and green belts and streets. Um that are being addressed by our staff. And uh our staff is definitely hard at work addressing those, and no pun intended, but they they definitely go through a process of triage of uh taking care of sorry and taking care of those issues that are really truly safety related. In other words, once generally speaking, once gravity has done its work and a limb is already down on the ground or a tree is down uh pending other damage that may result from that to uh homes or structures, of course. Um, you know, they're gonna pay attention to things like limbs that are hanging in trees and make sure that they get those secured first. So there is a process that our staff goes through uh in terms of uh prioritizing safety with what they're addressing first. Uh the generally speaking, the last things that are gonna get the attention are the aesthetics. Um so things like accumulated uh twigs and leaves and things like that that have accumulated in parks and green belts and streets and so forth are generally going to be sort of the last to get the attention, but they will be tended to. Uh and last, I would just encourage folks to sign up for our updates on social media. Uh we have information on this uh webpage that's on the screen for emergency information and preparedness. Uh and for uh reporting issues, uh we have the information again that's shown on the screen here for where and how to report issues that may need attention by our team. So we encourage folks to go through those channels. It helps ensure that things get into the proper workflow and work order requests uh as appropriate for our staff. All right.
openpublica.com