So Sacramento is about to get serious about water consumption. The city paid consultants to help them devise a public awareness program that seeks to make residents a lot more responsible when it comes to water conservation.
Look, I’m all for it. I am constantly amazed by how wasteful residents are when it comes to watering their lawns and washing their cars and so forth. I’ve got neighbors whose sprinklers run three times a day for 30 min at a time. But..
The irony is hilarious. By far and wide Sacramento’s roadways are amongst the ugliest in the nation. I can not believe the volume of weeds growing on the sides of our major arteries.
For 10 months out of the year our roadways are lined with dead vegetation. I notice the city and county spend a ton of money cutting those weeds down. Too bad they can’t pluck them from all the cracks too. You should see some of the weeds growing on the side of highways 5, 80, and 50. Or maybe you have.
Sorry, but given the dead state of vegetation across the valley, it’s downright HARD TO BELIEVE this is a city with a water conservation problem. In fact if I was visiting from out of town and driving I-5 from the airport to downtown I would be inclined to believe the county and city turned off the water years ago.
Forgive my naivety, but how is it that places like the bay area and LA and San Diego have trees and green vegetation and grass growing on the sides of so many of their freeways, yet here at the state’s capitol city it looks as though an atomic bomb fried us? Have we never had an elected official who stopped and thought, “hey, we should really do something about all these weeds lining 80 and 5! Let’s plant some trees! Let’s put in some desert landscaping, let’s do SOMETHING to make this city more beautiful to look at!”
How could something so OBVIOUS escape so many people?
I don’t get it.
In the meantime, lay off the water. Maybe if we conserve enough we’ll have enough to GREEN OUR FREEWAYS.
-Little Blogger
It’s crazy that most of our region has unmetered water (or at least isn’t charged on a metered basis). Human nature is such that if it’s free, we’re going to use the hell out of it. Time to go hose off my driveway.
Certainly, the freeways around here could use some sprucing up, but highway maintenance is the responsibility of Caltrans, not the city. The city’s water conservation efforts are a separate issue entirely.
I agree with nsw that it is nuts that most of the Sac area is unmetered. I personally hate the idea of metering, but I also realize it is one of the best ways to get people to stop blindly wasting water. Your neighbors who water 3x a day are in for a (well-deserved) rude awakening.
So you are saying CalTrans chose to beautify/green LA, San Diego, bay area etc freeways but not ours? Sorry but I don’t believe that. Go take a drive up 50 or 80 and see what Rancho and/or Roseville are doing at all of THEIR on/off ramps. Cal Trans has NOTHING to do with those projects.. do they?
You do realize you are talking about freeways right? You are complaining about the vegetation growing on the sides of our freeway. Really though? The last thing anyone of us should be concerned about is how the plants on the side of I-80 looks like. I’m not sure what parts of LA or SF you drive around, but as far as I know, there are no sides of the freeway to grow vegetation. Whenever I go to LA, I see about 5 lanes of traffic both ways and not a single green plant. If you look past the graffiti riddled walls that borders the freeway, you see little to no trees. Take a trip over HWY 50, east bound over the bridge from W. Sac and look around. You’ll see the tall buildings of downtown and nothing but trees to your left and right.
What purpose would trees on the side of the freeway provide? Other than being something people can crash into and something caltrans can just destroy if they ever plan to expand the freeways, I see none. I’d rather save the water for parks and other vegetation in the city than plants I’d see on the freeway for seconds as I drive by at 65 mph (or 20 mph, depending on the time of day).
Why conserve? For the amount the City Utility Dept. wants to raise your water bill, you might as well get your money’s worth.
Hey Nathan, there are hundreds of roadways throughout So Calif and the bay area with beautiful lawns, trees, flowers, etc. alongside them. Apparently you’ve never been to Irvine or San Jose, huh? Sorry mister but you have no idea what you are talking about. Joe is 100% correct about how ugly our roadways are and I happen to agree with him 100%. This city is in serious need of some beautification and Joe’s point remains that for all the water abuse, it’s hard to believe with how dead the vegetation is.
Agree with Joe on ugly Sacto roads. Just got back from San Diego last week. No comparison.
Someone is defending Sac’s roads?! Stockton has better looking roads than us!!
Hello! Don’t you realize the places you listed are coastal. Of course everything will likely be greener there. Click on Google maps to see where Sacramento is.
Testify!!
I lived in the San Diego area in my teen years — I visit the area often and I’m always impressed with the look of things — so much so that I’m often so deeply disappointed by the contrast between there and here.
Hey, speaking of fugly roads — this post inspired me to finally get around to sending the following:
From: Keith Sharward (WRCA)
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 6:11 AM
To: City Operator, City Of Sacramento
Subject: Weed Abatement Needed: 4000 Block of Truxel Road
I have noticed tremendous weed growth on the west side of Truxel Road between Prosper Road and Natomas Crossing Drive, including the landscaped parkway between the curb and sidewalk, and between the sidewalk and property line of the condominium development off Innovator Drive.
Not only is it a horrible eyesore, I believe it is a fire hazard.
The wide swath between the sidewalk and condominiums is the right of way for light rail in the future.
Interestingly, the area south of the condominium complex — adjacent to the neighborhood commercial village that includes Schools Federal Credit Union, Oshima Sushi, Starbucks, etc., is completely clear of weeds. The contrast is stunning!
The parkway in question is lined with trees and bushes, but the weeds are now taller than the bushes.
Who is responsible for the landscape maintenance of this area? Is there a landscaping district assessment being levied on nearby property owners for these features? Is the commercial village perhaps voluntarily landscaping the area fronting their property?
I realize I have asked a number of questions… The priority is obvously the abatement of the fire hazard, so please tend to that first, followed by the more curious questions that I have expressed. I would like to hold the responsible party/parties accountable — please don’t close my case until all of my questions are answered, and I would appreciate a case number so that I can track progress.
Thank you for your service.
Respectfully,
Keith Sharward
Co-Founder and Board Member, Witter Ranch Community Alliance (http://www.WitterRanchCommunity.org)
Member, Natomas Crime & Safety Leadership Team
Supporter, Angelique Ashby for City Council 2010 (http://www.AngeliqueAshby.com)
Yeah Keith I am with you all the way. There are some areas in Natomas (especially where you mentioned) that are out of control. Good letter!
@ The Office of the President. You’re right about the quality of street vegetation in Irvine and San Jose, although, see Saron’s comment above. Those cities have immensely better street vegetation than that of Sacramento. But then again, you’re also comparing two cities with different economic demographics. Irvine is a bubble, everyone knows that. I cannot comment on San Jose because I’ve had limited experience there. Comparing Irvine to Sac is like comparing an apple to a fruit no one knows about. But yes, the Sacramento roadways are disgusting. Then again, we are talking about the plants on the side of the road. We could ask the city to raise taxes again so we can pay for plants on the side of the road, but I’d rather not. It is interesting to see how much interest this has sparked since there about a billion other things more important in the world, or in Sacramento alone, than the status of the plants on the side of the road. I’d rather have our money go to schools and to those that need it than plant projects for our freeways. Looks like I’m alone here.
Plants on the side of the road in Natomas is never going to happen. Sorry.
Subject: RE: Weed Abatement Needed: 4000 Block of Truxel Road
From: “Keith Sharward” “Keith Sharward (WRCA)” [ Keith -at- WitterRanchCommunity -dot- org ]
Date: Sun, June 14, 2009 5:35 pm
To: “311 Call Center” [ 311 -at- cityofsacramento -dot- org ]
Sorry for the delay, Gina — I only just had a chance to drive by that area today, and you are correct — the weeds were in fact recently cut all along that area. It looks a thousand times better than the abandoned wasteland it looked like before — although the parkway strip still looks pretty bad with weeds that are now much shorter.
I am still interested in getting answers to my earlier questions when you have a moment.
Again, thank you for your service,
Keith Sharward
Co-founder and Board Member, Witter Ranch Community Alliance – http://www.WitterRanchCommunity.org
Member, Natomas Crime & Safety Leadership Team
Supporter, Angelique Ashby for City Council 2010 – http://www.AngeliqueAshby.com
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Weed Abatement Needed: 4000 Block of Truxel Road
From: “311 Call Center” [ 311 -at- cityofsacramento -dot- org
Date: Thu, June 11, 2009 8:10 am
To: "Keith Sharward (WRCA)" [ Keith -at- WitterRanchCommunity -dot- org ]
Hello -
We have had tremendous difficulty out in this area. The city (Fire Prevention with subcontractors) has been out abating some lots, however there have been others (Prosper and Innovator is a perfect example), that took us nearly 6 weeks to identify and contact the responsible party. I was advised yesterday coincidentally that this area was disced. I am not sure if you have been by there in the past 24 hours. If you drive by and I do not have accurate information, please let me know. The original tracking number for this is: 1-14520072 (date opened 4/21/09).
Again, if my information from yesterday is not accurate, let me know
Thank you,
Gina
What about Arena Boulevard sidewalk (south side)?? 4 foot high weeds growing out of the sidewalk itself. Looks like South Central
Determine the nearest intersection, then send e-mail to [ 311 -at- cityofsacramento -dot- org ]
Joe, you don’t want trees near Interstates – cars tend to crash into them and people die. As an aside, I’ve always admired the new city of Citrus Heights for its beautifully landscaped center divides and other areas around the city. Big props for Citrus Heights and its wonderful landscaping.
Hey Kahuna..that’s called Darwinism… Many places have trees next to the interstate…..or highways…just take a drive to Tahoe.
I think the overall point is that this region lacks beautification measures often seen in other communities. Of course there are areas of the state that are more likely to have more natural vegitation along the freeways — the routes to Tahoe are an example of this. But I think the overall point is that there is generally a lack of landscaping along our freeways, and I agree, that is really unfortunate.