The Slab
Ren, over at the Ren's World blog, beat me to it. I wanted to do a post on The Slab, eventually, but I never got around to taking pictures of it. He's got some good ones posted although I don't know that any of them do justice to that one REAL tight curve I remember having to go around on The Slab back then.
For those who don't know what The Slab was, it was where 101 passed above the Eel River years ago. It was located between Piercy and Leggett and was a real skinny stretch of road with at least one real tight turn on it that scared me to death even as a teenager. I was surprised even cars could pass each other going through there, never mind trucks but, if you wanted to drive 101 south from Piercy back then, you had to use The Slab.
Thank goodness we were able to build a bypass around that. Anybody remember when the bypass was built? I can't.
If we had some of the enviros around back then that we have today, like the ones opposed to the widening of 101 at Richardson Grove, I can't help but wonder if we'd still be forced to traverse The Slab.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 7:26 AM
17 comments
17 Comments:
Um, Fred, the enviros you speak of with disdain advocate for a bypass around Richardson Grove, like the bypass around the Slab.
They probably wouldn't advocate a bypass if it involved cutting down trees, I'm sure.
I met a Greyhound on that stretch once when I was driving a moving van. I had to back down to let him get through. That was in 1982. You could still pull right over to the side of the road and park at the gift shop in Richardson's Grove, too.
It could be the trees, or perhaps the....?
Actually, its whatever the NEC decides is "at risk" of signicant impacts such that they can create enough public hysteria so their constituents feel obliged to hit the "DONATE NOW" button on their web page and keep the ball rolling.
Pretty smooth operation. Particulariy when the choir is like a flock of sheep.
8:45 is really disingenuous about the "enviros" supporting a Richardson Grove bypass. The cost has already been analyzed and rejected by Caltrans because of the outrageous cost. 8:45's comments are beginning to lay the foundation for a permanent split between business and environmental segments in our community. It this keeps up it will lead to the business community NEVER supporting anything the enviros advocate.
I actually would prefer a bypass myself, but it isn't going to happen.
I suspect many of the enviros opposing the straightening and, instead, proposing a bypass are using it as a diversion. They know a bypass is highly unlikely to happen but, by pushing the bypass issue, they can use it as yet another ruse to hold up the road straightening.
Even if Caltrans did give in to the enviros and drop the straightening, opting for an eventual bypass, it would take decades for a bypass to even get started. The enviros then win, at least for their lifetimes.
Being a libertarian,and knowing the nature of governments and the projects they propose,I'm a bit surprised you support this Fred.This will be a boondoggle for years and years to come.They are only proposing cutting 87 trees,not nearly enough to make a damn difference to alleviate your fears of driving through there.Yet CalTrans will have the inch in it needs to propose projects further south which are far more dangerous and difficult for larger trucks to get through,and the public will back it,and you'll continue to gripe about government ineptitude.In this instance here,you will have asked for it.
Years ago when the bypass was being looked into I seem to remember that the cost at that time was prohibitive as CalTrans had to purchase the bypass land. Also it was land with lots of trees and thousands would have been cut instead of a couple of small redwoods and the other trees that are being planned. Maybe some of the people that object to the trees being cut should look into a tree sit and they would find out that the other trees that are going to be cut would not hold up a person in a tree sitting situation. I have read the irrational posts on the proposed straigtening and can't figure out where some of the people even got the ideas that the big redwoods will be cut down. Maybe they have neglected to actually read the CalTrans document.
As far as I'm concerned any improvement is better than the way it is now. Even a little more room between me and vehicles going the other way would save my heart a few extra beats.
Will it be worth the money spent? Hard to say. Whether it will be all that much of an improvement? Only time will tell.
"...and can't figure out where some of the people even got the ideas that the big redwoods will be cut down.".
I think some is just being misinformed and some is deliberate misinformation being spread in order to build opposition to the project.
They do that with timber in general. I read a comment on one of the Sacramento Bee's news stories a few weeks ago. I actually forget the original issue, but someone wrote that we don't have any old growth anymore because "redwoods have been cut to near extinction."
I had to reply that there were thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of acres of old growth redwoods but most are in parks.
I also pointed out that redwood grows like weeds, often sprouts new suckers from stumps of cut trees and have never been in danger of extinction.
People hear stuff like that and actually act upon it.
The best possible way to get legal trucks into the north coast is to realign the road through Richardson’ Grove. It would have the least impact to the environment, and it is the least expensive plan.
Actually it could be accomplished for about $100,000.oo, but environmental boondoggles have increased the cost to $8,000,000.oo.
That's what these creeps do best. Waist money,time,productivity. O and of course glad hand. New crops of stary eyed HSU students to confuse and fleece will keep the NEC sucking our lifes blood like fat tics for years to come.
About a month ago I went to Redding and in the Buckhorn area there were big tractors cutting into certain areas but it wasn't right next to the road but on some of the worst corners. I wondered at that time if was part of the straightening for that section.
We need a toll road.
The answer to your original question is 1975-76
What we need in Humboldt County is a Troll Road.
Then we can round up the Trolls and send them down that road.
Well, it's a thought.
Anonymous said...
That's what these creeps do best. Waist money,time,productivity. O and of course glad hand. New crops of stary eyed HSU students to confuse and fleece will keep the NEC sucking our lifes blood like fat tics for years to come.
2:42 AM
Out of respect for our common language (English) I present below a somewhat more polished version of the post above.
>>> Anonymous said...
That's what these creeps do best. Waste money, time, productivity. Oh and of course glad hand. New crops of starry-eyed HSU students to confuse and fleece will keep the NEC sucking our life's blood like fat ticks for years to come.
2:42 AM
Good points, well-stated, now enhanced by a few changes in spelling. No need to thank me. It was my pleasure to help you make your points.
Post a Comment
<< Home