NC Media Watch

A quest for reason and accuracy in letters to the editor, guest editorials and other issues of interest to the citizens of Western Nevada County.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Where is the second level analysis?

The current Union survey points to a problem in Nevada County, the inability of some citizens to think long term, to do second level analysis of a problem. They lack the ability to look beyond the current traffic congestion to longer term solutions.

Here are the interim survey results from: “Which traffic problems should Grass Valley focus on?”

The Brunswick Basin. 34.82% (125)
The Doresy Drive on/off ramps 24.79% (89)
The Idaho-Maryland exits. 22.56% (81)
None, they should focus on sidewalks and footpaths 8.64% (31)
None, they should add more public transportation. 9.19% (33)

As one poster noted, building the Dorsey Drive Interchange will reduce the pressure on the Brunswick Drive over crossing and interchange. This is second level thinking, looking beyond the immediate problem to longer term solutions. This was lost on those wanting the Brunswick Basin congestion fixed.

What do you think?

Click here for a private e-mail comment. For public comment select comments below.


Blogger Sherry said...

FINALLY...we can agree on something. :-)

(I think.)

After almost 20 years of watching the traffic increases I'm CONTINUALLY amazed at the reluctance to address on/off ramps at Dorsey. That one "fix" would alleviate part of the current Brunswick and Idaho-Maryland problems. What in the world is Grass Valley waiting for?

Which brings up "no growth". Uh, huh, and where would we find THAT as serious topic in local debate? :-)

Tue Sep 27, 08:56:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Russ Steele said...


The delay has been the lack of State funds and rising land costs during the dalay. The State has taken transportation funds, collected through gas taxes, for 4 years to help with the budget crisis. We are over 6 million short of the required funds.

We are looking at alternatives, maybe half an interchange now, the other half latter.

Wed Sep 28, 08:12:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Sherry said...

You asked me, "What do you think?" and I guess I should have known you would answer with WHY what I thought wouldn't go anywhere. :-)

You could have just answered, "politics as usual" to both of my questions---that's "fact".

I hope the "we" working toward addressing the lack of planned off and on ramps at Dorsey are successful in building them BEFORE they have to take the antiquated bridge OUT. (Side effect of politics AS USUAL?)

Sometimes, don't you just wonder what the hell The Union, (or anyone) bothers to "poll" for? Worse, I wonder why I bother to answer!

This sort of ties in with all of the Cal Trans workers I see at my end of the county---every other year they send "crews" to survey the highway at the Nevada/Yuba County line --- HAVE BEEN DOING THAT all of the time I've lived here --- the "consensus" is that the hill needs to be cut off. Will it ever occur to ANYONE that WITHOUT ACTION, it's a wasted and expensive effort, spending entire summers "surveying" into infinity, and as the death toll climbs---the accidents pile up? (And yes, I'm familiar with the "most lives lost" gets the nod when determining fix, UNLESS you have representation in Lake Wildwood.)

Please, I don't think I can handle "justification" for the waste umbrella'd under "economy", whether it's "windfall" money or "crisis" lack of, TRULY important spending seems to follow the money when NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS line up to be counted---"representation" continues to condone the repeated and redundant surveying, soliciting, back-burner'ing issues of importance through each successive administration. I can imagine, by now, that Webster's would define "status quo" and "politick" in the same, likely demeaning vernacular, as it attached it to constituency concerns of a given community and it's "leadership" -- and the rant, without ALL seeking change in this skewed & screwed government, will go equally ignored. "Rant" will only be recognized as "dialogue" when it fits representation's agenda.

Thu Sep 29, 09:35:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Russ Steele said...


I cannot defend Caltrans, nor the process of how we fund out highways. It is a broken, process with no way to fix it, with out killing it a starting over with a clean sheet of paper. It will never happen, but we can let the guilty know we want change at the ballot box.

One way we can fix local problem is to vote in a local transportation sales tax, then we will have money we can control locally to fix our transportation and traffic congestion problems.

Thu Sep 29, 10:16:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Sherry said...

Oh, I don't know Russ, if Arnold can fire the entire flood control board, just, as "... we were really beginning to make a lot of progress too, in bringing out the dangers of living behind — and allowing development — behind old agricultural levees because the public is not aware of it." (SF Gate), MAYBE he'll take on Cal Trans. (joke) I'm PRETTY SURE we're going to need a lot more RICH PEOPLE than POOR PEOPLE living here if we're going to "amass wealth" (what it will take thinking locally instead of globally) in raising tax money, on any level. Have you crunched any numbers on the per capita requirements, AND, considering the "advertised" versus the "reality" based costs of seeing any projects through? The "community" might want to know what they're buying into BEFORE they commit. (The recent "fire tax" has real scary---much scarier than another wildfire---connotation.)

Thu Sep 29, 10:48:00 AM PDT  

Post a Comment

<< Home