Correspondence - #19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Orozco, Norma From:Nathaniel Greensides <mynci90@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 18, 2021 4:38 PM To:eComment; Hernandez, Johnathan Subject:public comment - item 19 May 18 2021 City Council meeting While it is applaudable that the City's per capita emissions are lower than other California cities, it is still not zero. This begs the question: why? Of the strategies mentioned in the Staff report, two items pique my interest: enhancing access to sustainable transportation modes and building sustainable communities. In California, especially Southern California, there's a lot of unnecessary pavement which can cause a heat island effect. This can be offset by requiring that a percentage of earth exposure and green space be included by any new developments in the City or any re-developments. Santa Ana is a part of a great lowland which the indigenous Tongva understood would periodically flood. The solution should never have been to pave over the rich soil and Santa Ana river, thus disrupting the natural water cycle. Development of "retails service nodes" ought to include initiatives to assist local startups and entrepreneurship instead of paving way for cheap rent for multinational or even just national corporations to set up shop in Santa Ana. Local incentives for solar panel installations on homes and businesses too should be considered if the city is serious about renewable energy. With this, new local jobs could be created - after all: someone needs to service those panels as much as there's a whole slew of sub industries which have resulted from the fossil fuel and automobile industries. Dedicated bike and bus lanes on busy thoroughfares will incentivize local commuters to opt for such thus reducing the amount of cars on the road allowing for those who have an economic necessity to drive more efficiently with less car-dedicated road space (https://youtu.be/XN-tSpQZmYk) Free bus fare for lower income households will allow for one less expense on rent burdened families in Santa Ana (or even city wide free transportation?). Partnering with regional transportation authorities on new forms of public transportation instead of more time tested poor quality options (e.g. OC Streetcar which reduces road space, is dangerous for bicyclists, and is no faster than sitting in one's own car) such as elevated trains, or even where feasible, underground electric trains which would also have long term returns for the local and regional economies. Absolutely - all the small changes that can be implemented will have huge impacts for future generations (switching to LED streetlights for example) but that still leaves the assumption that streetlights in all of the city are even necessary to begin with. Bike sharing stations - great idea! But it still leaves the question of safe bikeways for those who can bicycle - another huge upfront infrastructure investment but would also have long term positive returns for decades to come. The spirit of the original agenda item from March 2, 2021 is a great one, but finds itself hindered by... apprehension at best, active resistance at worst ... on the part of those who have grown accustomed to their 1