HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/7/2025 Item 8a, Slem (2)
Charles M. Slem <cslem@calpoly.edu>
Sent:Wednesday, October
To:E-mail Council Website
Cc:Daniel, Josh; Little, Joe
Subject:WUI Study Session Council Meeting October 7, 2025
First, kudos for one of the best city council meetings I can remember.
Clearly the council, the staff, and the Fire Department preparation provided clarity and
reassurance for what is a daunting and complex challenge the city faces in trying to
implement the code. Council member questions covered most of the questions I had, and I
came away with confidence that everyone was on the same side.
There are two overlapping issues that I believe might further clarify and mitigate the
challenges the city faces.
I. Feasibility given the magnitude of the changes:
If now over 8,000 properties are expected to conform to the mandate in three years; and
estimates ranged between 20 - 50,000 dollars per parcel to meet the regulations; and there
are already problems in getting landscaping projects done in a timely manner, both the
astronomical costs and immediate backlog/gridlock makes this timeline not possible.
Just multiplying $50,000 X 8,000 was mind boggling.
???My Suggestions
1. Quick study to determine feasibility parameters -
2. Create a phase-in plan, starting with the highest risked parcels first.
3. Appeals to state powers-that-be to the necessity of additional resources to make this
work.
II. Question the Maps — For Clarification of Assumptions and Criteria
The methodology used to construct the maps needs to be clarified.
The comment in the meeting that the state did not provide the criteria and data that led to the
construction of maps is troubling. The comment that the City of San Luis Obispo had
experienced one of the greatest magnitude of changes among California cities is also
troubling.
??????Are we that unique?
1
The documents I linked in my last email included criticisms of the state for using criteria that
didn’t apply to the local areas, as well as concerns about the great pressured rush to get the
code out to the entire state asap after the LA fires. Under these conditions, there is a
possibility that this may have led to mistakes.
Back in the day when I was actively involved in research and consulting on the human side of
technology in advanced manufacturing settings, it was not unheard of for a component on a
printed circuit board to be designed to be 100X bigger than the printer circuit board itself.
Something as simple as a missed decimal point can wreak havoc on calculations.
??????Did that happen here?
Is the feasibility issue really just a map problem?
???My Suggestions
1. Request (or demand through state legislative representatives) for the underlying
criteria and data in creating the maps.
2. Employ Cal Poly Profs who have specific expertise in these kinds of modeling programs
to analyze the assumptions, criteria, and calculations that went into creating the maps.
Again, my appreciation for the well conceived and run meeting.
Sincerely,
Charles Slem
348 Lincoln Street
2