[GREN-Exec] First draft GREN 5 year review of ROW climate action
Susan Koswan
susankoswan at execulink.com
Sun Feb 28 14:14:34 EST 2021
Hi Susan C,
We had to say more about How We Move. For your consideration:
Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation have increased from 40 to
49 percent of the total in the region since the 2013 Action Plan
<http://www.climateactionwr.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ClimateActionPlanWaterlooRegion_Full_Nov2013.pdf>report.
Getting people out of their personal ICE vehicles is the biggest
challenge that has never been solved because driving your own car is a
conflux of emotion, marketing, freedom, convenience, status, pride,
rite-of-passage and necessity, and now personal safety with COVID-19.
Everything in this section addresses the physical infrastructure
necessary to optimize active transportation, but a social marketing
campaign must be in place to address the “soft” aspects. What are the
barriers? What are the incentives?
Planning for the 15-minute city is good, but that has to include the
suburbs. Adjunct urban design professor at the University of British
Columbia, Scot Hein, proposes that a 5 minute walk
<https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2018/10/17/Five-Minute-City-Better-Vancouver/>
is more in line with what people will actually do, and offers a design
of 5-minute catchment areas for walkability. Within these hyper-local
neighbourhoods, connected to public transit, are all the amenities
needed to live.
How we live and work is essentially how we move. Williamsburg in
Kitchener, with a central commercial hub, is a step in the right
direction, but still missing the key element of 5-minute walk.
Susan K
On 2/28/2021 1:44 PM, Greg Michalenko wrote:
>
> I'm now putting some things together -- too many end of Feb deadlines.
> Will send in piece by piece. Incorporate what ye will, don't wait
> unduly long for me. I can always make a submission of my own.
>
> - G
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Executive <executive-bounces at gren.ca> on behalf of Susan
> Bryant <shbryant at uwaterloo.ca>
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 11:30 AM
> *To:* John Jackson
> *Cc:* GREN Executive
> *Subject:* Re: [GREN-Exec] First draft GREN 5 year review of ROW
> climate action
> Hi John-
>
> I was about to phone you when this email came in! I will incorporate
> these points into the draft Susan K put together and then wait to see
> if Kevin and Greg have additions. There’s time. I emailed the Region
> to tell them the GREN submission will be late. As Susan K noted, we
> don’t have much to say about the How We Move section, so if anyone
> does, please send on.
>
> I’m glad you focused on the city green space issue. As a country
> bumpkin who moved to the city, I guess I’ve been too impressed by what
> the cities do in contrast to the townships. Good corrective here.
>
> How come we are all so busy?? It’s weird. But then most everything is
> a bit weird.
>
> Thanks, John.
>
> Susan B
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 28, 2021, at 10:56 AM, John Jackson <jjackson at web.ca
> <mailto:jjackson at web.ca>> wrote:
>
>> Great work everyone. Very impressive. Sorry that i haven't reviewed
>> it until the last minute. The current months have been insane because
>> added onto my normal work is the teaching of my waste class at UofW
>> totally on-line for the first time.
>>
>> My comments are only a few and should be easy to integrate:
>>
>> 1. in Recs under 12 it only refers to townships. I think these are
>> excellent and am really glad they are here, but we imply that the
>> cities are doing fine. In the matter of creating greenspace we
>> need greenspace created in the cities as well to provide all
>> kinds of energy saving provisions as well as to give people who
>> live in the city easy daily access to greenpeace. Every time a
>> city dweller steps outside they should experience nature. And
>> they should not have to use cars or even transit to experience
>> some aspect of nature.
>> 2. In recs under 13 on green infrastructure it again focuses on
>> townships. This is really good and the needs for townships are
>> different and so well pointed out. But we ignore the cities
>> saying that they are doing "pretty good." "Pretty good" is just
>> passable, which is far from what we need for the future. So in
>> terms of green infrastructure in the cities: Yes they have plans,
>> etc., but they constantly compromise when putting in
>> infrastructure such as building roads and rebuilding old roads
>> and streets. They regularly chop down wonderful mature trees that
>> are major contributors to addressing cc issues, to put the
>> priority on cars. Even if they don't cut down the trees, they
>> shorten the lives of trees by chopping off parts of their root
>> systems. Also the cities fund important work by REEP to get green
>> infrastructure installed. However, this work is piece meal and
>> will not get us where we need to be nearly quickly enough - if
>> ever. This is not REEPs fault. It is because there is not
>> sufficient dollars put into these programs. Also the Region needs
>> to look at ways to r*equire* leading edge green infrastructure in
>> new developments (residential, institutional, commercial and
>> industrial and also rehabilitation in existing developments.
>> E.G., change the parking lots in shopping malls, churches,
>> community centres, etc.
>> 3. The stuff on agriculture is an excellent addition. I particularly
>> like the sentence about making the entire country-side line
>> "permanent." Find a way to highlight this better. My biggest fear
>> is that each time we review the ROP we will move the line outwards.
>> 4. In rec 18 near end where it talks about including parks, please
>> put into this "and benches". I am finding increasingly that
>> benches are seen as a problem - as drawing undesirables,
>> especially in downtown areas.
>>
>>
>> John
>> --------------------s---------
>> John Jackson
>> 17 Major Street
>> Kitchener N2H 4R1
>> 519-744-7503
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2021, at 2:48 PM, Susan Koswan <susankoswan at execulink.com
>>> <mailto:susankoswan at execulink.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi GREN exec,
>>>
>>> I've attached the first run-through of GREN's submission to ROW's 5
>>> year climate change review paper. Still needs a lot of work and
>>> input on How We Move. I've generally formatted both Susan B and
>>> Sandra B's input for How we live, work, build, but have done no editing.
>>>
>>> Please. Someone take it and run with it. My brain hurts.
>>>
>>> Susan K
>>>
>>> <Climate Change 5 year review ROW GREN
>>> comments.docx>_______________________________________________
>>> Executive mailing list
>>> Executive at gren.ca <mailto:Executive at gren.ca>
>>> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca
>>> <http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Executive mailing list
>> Executive at gren.ca <mailto:Executive at gren.ca>
>> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca
>> <http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Executive mailing list
> Executive at gren.ca
> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20210228/45b835e2/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Executive
mailing list