Historically, city government has approved development
projects as proposed, with little or no public involvement. If this process
continues, Grass Valley will be a very different place in 20 years, with
strip malls, massive traffic congestion, and a struggling downtown.
Traffic
Already, several intersections
in Grass Valley operate at the "failure"
level during certain times of the day. Increased traffic congestion--along
with air and noise pollution and parking problems--will be one of the
most noticeable impacts of unrestrained growth and development
away from the city center.
Lost opportunities
Shopping centers, housing developments,
and freeway interchanges are permanent.
If they are developed independent of a larger plan we may lose opportunities to make our
city more attractive, vital, and pedestrian-friendly.
Future annexations and growth
Four large annexations
to the city are in the works. All together, they would increase the size
of Grass Valley by 65% and more than double
the population in the next 15 years.
To get an idea of
how rapidly Grass Valley could grow in the next 15 years,
look at these graphs of
increases in population and acreage.
Rural sprawl
Across the US, people are moving to rural areas in record numbers, re-creating in
the countryside the same city-like problems they are escaping--traffic congestion, noise, air
pollution, and suburban-like development. Smart policies can absorb our share of these newcomers and
still avoid
rural sprawl.
A flawed planning process
The city's planning process is flawed because it begins with developers
instead of with the public. Public input
is received too late, near the end of the process, when the
critical decisions have already been made. Community Development Director
Joe Heckel and the Planning Department are taking steps to change this situation.
We must work with them to ensure that these improvements become the norm instead
of the exception.
Read more about our ideas for improving the city's
planning process.
|
|
|
Regular public meetings at City Hall
City Council: 7 pm,
2nd and 4th Tuesdays, in the council chambers.
Planning Commission: 7 pm, 3rd Tuesdays, in the council chambers.
Development Review Committee: 9 am, 2nd and 4th Tuesdays, in the Hullender Room.
Council agendas are usually available a
few days ahead of time on Yubanet.com. |
 |
|
Tues
20 Feb |
|
GV Planning Commission meeting. 7 pm, city council chambers. On the agenda:
appeal of DeMartini showroom approval
|
|
|
|
Tues
27 Feb |
|
Development Review Committee meeting. 9 am, Hullender Room.
|
|
|
|
Tues
27 Feb |
|
GV City Council meeting. 7 pm, city council chambers. On the agenda:
new development code |
To learn more about the issues listed below from the managed-growth perspective,
read the pamphlet
by Harold Berliner and the
Other
Voices column by Eric Engles.
No SouthHill shopping center
The out-of-town owners owners of the the Bear River Sawmill Site property want to build a
shopping center ("SouthHill Village") that would include another Safeway store, a Longs Drugs, and other
retail outlets. Please write, call, email, or talk
to city officials and decision-makers
and let them know what you think about buidling another shopping
center.
For more information, see the Current Issues page.
No massive development at Northstar
The out-of-town owner of the Northstar property wants to build approximately 2300
housing units, more than six times what the general plan calls for.
Please write, call, email, or talk
to city officials and decision-makers
and let them know what you think about the effects of this traffic-generating growth.
For more information, see the Current Issues page.
|
|
City Documents for Public Review
Important planning, study, and review documents on this page, which is hard to find on the City website.
New city council
With the seating of new city council member Janet Arbuckle, the Grass Valley City Council is back to five members--and
very different from the council of a year ago.
New city manager in Grass Valley's future
The end of Gene Haroldsen's tenure as city manager provides an opportunity for the city to hire a manager
more in tune with citizens' priorities and able to lead the city through a challenging period.
The Arguments Against Northstar and SouthHill
Former district attorney Harold Berliner has put together a 20-page pamphlet outlining the many reasons why
the Northstar project, the SouthHill Village project, and the Crestview interchange are bad for Grass Valley.
You can download a PDF version of the pamphlet here.
Required reading if you are concerned about runaway growth in Grass Valley.
Don't Roseville Grass Valley!
Grass Valley Neighbors has launched a campaign to increase public awareness of the massive
growth facing Grass Valley. Our new bumper stickers and buttons say "Don't Roseville Grass Valley!"
Get your own sticker by emailing us or calling Eric at 273-3934.
They are free, but we ask that you
consider making a $1 donation.
Idaho-Maryland Mine application being reviewed by city
Advocates for the mine are pushing hard to shape public opinion in their
favor. They are either not mentioning or putting positive spin on the many negative impacts that active mining
and ceramics manufacturing operations could have on our community. Grass Valley residents need to ask
the hard questions about the mining proposal. Do we want a large-scale extractive and manufacturing
operation right in our town? Does it make sense to burn an amount of natural gas every year that would otherwise
be enough for more than 25,000 houses?
Do we want dozens of heavily-laden trucks traveling on our streets every day?
Do we want huge amounts of potentially tainted water dumped
into Wolf Creek? Do we want to fool around with the local water table and potentially affect people's
wells? To get educated about this issue, take a look at the
collection of informative
links and downloadable documents on the Wolf Creek Community Alliance website.
Grass Valley can grow at a healthy rate without any of the 'Big 4' annexations!
Research by a team of seven Grass Valley residents has revealed that landowners within the
current city limits are proposing a total of 2756 housing units to be built over the next 10 years.
That's almost twice as many units as the state requires to be available during this time frame.
New streets master plan shows city can't absorb traffic generated by proposed annexations
The city's new draft Streets Master Plan
offers various proposals for "fixing" the city's most congested intersections,
including more stop lights, rerouting of traffic, and a new bypass from Ridge Road to highway 20.
All of the proposals have serious drawbacks, and have a chance of working only if the city's growth
is limited to 2% per year. Plan author Grant Johnson stated at the recent joint meeting that downtown is already
at the point of absorbing as much traffic as it can. Johnson also pointed out that accommodating all
the traffic that would be generated by approving all four proposed annexations would mean
building "six-lane freeways." To download the draft Street Master Plan,
go the city's website
and click on the link to the plan under "Information Services."
|
