The City of Davis could be moving ahead with a crucial step in its General Plan Update, as it is being asked by city staff to authorize a contract amendment with Raimi + Associates to develop a preliminary mobility concept for the city’s northeast quadrant.
At its April 1, 2025, meeting, the City Council will be asked to approve the $45,867 amendment to the existing professional services agreement, bringing the total cost of the General Plan Update to $2,593,921.
This new mobility concept will explore how Davis can accommodate future growth in its northeastern sector with an integrated transportation plan that emphasizes streets, public transit, and active transportation infrastructure.
At a recent Davis City Council meeting, Councilmember Bapu Vaitla proposed prioritizing transportation planning in the city’s north-northeast corridor as part of the ongoing General Plan Update.
The idea, originally suggested by Councilmember Donna Neville, aims to ensure that transportation considerations are addressed early in the planning process—especially with multiple peripheral development proposals on the horizon in that area.
“I would love it if we could think about that northeast quadrant and staff could work with the general plan consultant to come up with some options on how we can push that towards the beginning of the general plan process,” Vaitla stated during the discussion.
Councilmember Gloria Partida expressed support for the proposal but sought clarification on how such a change would affect the timeline of the overall update.
Then City Manager Mike Webb responded that if the council provides formal direction, city staff would work with the General Plan consultant team to determine what advancing the transportation review would entail, including the associated process, cost, and timeline. These findings would then be presented to the council for further consideration and potential adjustments to the plan’s scope.
The northeast area of Davis, which includes potential development sites such as Village Farms and Willowgrove (Shriners), has been a focus of recent planning efforts. This preliminary mobility plan is intended to lay the groundwork for future transportation investments as the city continues to meet housing and infrastructure demands.
To do so, transportation consultants Fehr & Peers will analyze the cumulative transportation impacts based on projected land uses—such as those already approved, in the development pipeline, or proposed through the Housing Element and Downtown Specific Plan. The analysis will leverage the city’s existing travel demand model to generate traffic forecasts and assess potential improvements.
City staff noted that this preliminary work is intended to inform the General Plan Update process but does not replace the comprehensive environmental review that will accompany the full update.
The approved scope of work includes three main tasks.
Transportation Network Concept Development and Analysis where Fehr & Peers will create a high-level mobility network map that includes roads, transit lines, and active transportation elements (e.g., bike lanes and pedestrian pathways). Using existing modeling tools, the consultants will simulate traffic flows for different development scenarios and identify areas where congestion could occur.
The model will look at: daily and peak-hour traffic volumes, vehicle-to-capacity (V/C) ratios, and congested travel speeds
The analysis will focus on up to 40 street segments and 15 intersections. Fehr & Peers will recommend appropriate traffic control devices—such as roundabouts or signals—but will not include detailed geometry or turning lane plans at this stage.
Second will be planning-level cost estimates and funding options.
A companion analysis will estimate costs for building and maintaining the proposed infrastructure, comparing different types of projects—like new roads versus transit improvements. The fact sheet will also outline potential funding sources that could be tapped to pay for the improvements. Right-of-way costs will not be included at this stage.
The third part will entail public presentations and stakeholder engagement.
Fehr & Peers will participate in up to two public meetings, including commission or City Council briefings, to present their findings and get feedback. Additional coordination will occur with city staff and Raimi + Associates throughout the process.
The final deliverables will include two highly visual fact sheets—one summarizing the mobility network and the other outlining costs and funding sources. Each will be prepared in 11×17 landscape format to support future community engagement.
According to the staff report, although the final land use model for the General Plan is still under development, city staff believes the basic conclusions of the mobility analysis will remain valid. “The necessary improvements to accommodate growth in the city will likely be the same,” the report states, “with different amounts of traffic assigned to them by the model.”
In short, the exercise is not designed to produce final recommendations but to help guide discussions and infrastructure priorities as Davis updates its long-range planning framework.
The $45,867 cost of this contract amendment will be paid for through General Plan Update fees collected from building permits. It does not include the cost of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which will come later in the process.
The preliminary mobility concept is expected to be completed within four to six weeks from authorization, meaning the city could have results by mid-May.
As Davis prepares for future housing needs and grapples with regional planning mandates, this mobility study could offer a data-driven look at how its transportation system must evolve.
With an emphasis on sustainable growth and multimodal infrastructure, city officials said they hope to position Davis to meet its growth targets without sacrificing the quality of life residents expect.
This is a good approach … a proactive approach. But with that said, it shouldn’t be just the Northeast Corridor, but rather the Covell-Mace Corridor from the Lake intersection on the west to the I-80 intersection on the east.
MW, how would you do that, considering all that has been developed? I mean that seriously. What we have been talking about for the NE is because most of it hasn’t been developed yet.
Some people are never satisfied
Ron, why would you not want the City to be proactive about the Northwest Corridor as well as the Northeast Corridor?
Not Ron Glick but personally I think a narrower focus, particularly one aimed at where most of the new development is likely to occur is a better course of action – with a longer term focus on a broader solution.
Ive been drawing plans for transit in the northeast corridor for 2+ years… where is MY $45K?
Kidding aside, while this is amazing progress: I’m VERY concerned about the approach of “lets let a consultant propose something”. Look at how the alternatives that the VF EIR consultant came up with… they were pretty disconnected from reality and never once suggested an alternative that was trantsit-focused, even though many of us in the community made those specific requests at the scoping meeting.
Will the consultant make an assumption that the line has to travel down the existing street? (you lose half the potential ridership that way)
Will they have the creativity to propose an integrated Transit-Oriented development? Or will they assume that all of suburbia has to follow the same failed single family model in perpetuity? I dont think they have a dog in the fight to want to encourage more affordable housing,
Will they even consider a non-car transit focused right of way seperate from the Covell / mace boulevard? Its the best option here.. but unless we ask for it… I doubt they will come up with this on their own.
Firms like this don’t get rewarded for being creative. They just turn out what is asked from them, they try to conform to contemporaty norms and they will try to avoid anything that is non-standard or controvertial unless we specifically ask them to include it.
In this case, car-served suburbia has decades of precedent. It is a totally discredited concept… If we dont want a bad plan out of this… we need to ask for specific features.
That entire area already has a “transportation plan”. It’s called the “Mace on/off ramps” from I-80.
You guys are high if you think that you can control motor vehicle usage, outside of a place like San Francisco. (They have a multi-prong approach to the war on cars, there – make it difficult to drive, make it difficult to park, etc.). Close off various streets and major thoroughfares (like the Great Highway) to traffic. The next step will be to club motorists with a literal stick. (Though Davis does have some alleys where motorists can be diverted and jumped.)
Also, what if you spend a bunch of time/money on a fake plan (to accommodate a fake housing crisis, along with fake threats from YIMBY-types), and it STILL loses at the ballot box? (Which seems like the most-likely outcome.)
And what about those using applications like WAZE, who are just passing through? Combined with the traffic from high-rise developments outside of town? (By the way, most towns have dense development in the CENTER, rather than on the fringes.)
Hell, Village Farms isn’t even planning to provide a grade-separated bike/pedestrian path, over ANY of the roads.