HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/13/2022 Item 7a, Greening
From:Eric Greening <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Eric Greening comments on Item 7a for the December 13th council meeting
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Hello!
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed update of the city's Climate Action Plan! If meaningfully
implemented, what you have before you has considerable virtues and promises to make a meaningful difference in local
quality of life and the state of the global atmosphere. I would not mind seeing more specificity about how drawdown
would be enhanced, in a biodiversity-friendly way, in the city's open space areas and elsewhere, and would like to see
more emphasis, in the section on green building, on passive solar architecture, both for new buildings and in retrofits,
relative to minimizing the need for electrons in keeping inhabitants in a comfort zone between extremes of cold and
heat.
My main emphasis, in terms of pointing out a missing element in an otherwise praiseworthy plan, relates to the goals
and policies for a connected community--in other words, the transportation system. The plan's metrics are largely based
on transportation choices within the city, and this neglects San Luis Obispo's status as a MAJOR attractor of commuters--
indeed, its economic vitality is very much dependent on regular, generally daily, movement of tens of thousands of
people living in outlying areas of the county into and out of San Luis Obispo itself. The considerable ecological footprint
of these travels needs as much attention to reduction as does movement within the city itself.
For this reason, goals and policies relating to transit need implementation not only through the city's own system, but
require robust support on the city's part for the regional system--the RTA--and other providers who bring people in and
out. The more mode shift can be achieved among commuters, the more progress on emissions reduction can be made,
with collateral benefits such as reduced need for parking.
I mention the RTA in particular because not only do their current levels of service, like those of the city's system, still fall
short of pre-pandemic standards, and even farther short of improvements called for in the adopted Short-range Transit
Plan, but the RTA is imminently threatened with major service CUTS in the event that threatened redefinition of "urban
areas" were to eliminate a very significant funding stream relative to redesignation of the North and South County urban
agglomerations as rural. While the City of SLO is to be praised for using 100% of its own LTF money to provide transit (it
intended use) rather than diverting some to road work as some jurisdictions do, it needs to do everything possible to
collaborate with other jurisdictions in the county, through SLOCOG and other means, in insulating the RTA from
damaging cuts and creating a pathway for the improvements called for in the Short-range Transit Plan to ultimately be
attained.
1
I might also add, in the realm of active transportation, that the Chorro Valley Multi-use Trail is a critical link whose
completion, at least in Phase ! to Cuesta College, is vitally important. I realize that a major obstacle to implementation is
not of the city's making, and not even within the formal jurisdiction of SLOCOG--namely, the failure of Cal Poly to
identify a route across their campus--but it is to be hoped that the City will use its considerable influence, its relationship
with Cal Poly, to seek cooperation in making this needed connection.
To sum up, the City's ecological footprint is not confined to activities within its boundaries. To the extent that it depends
on commuters, it is co-responsible with the commuters' originating jurisdictions for attaining emissions reductions that
benefit all.
Thanks again for the opportunity to comment!
Many thanks, Eric Greening
2