Sustainability Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2022 07 20

Home Browse Search

Sustainability Advisory Board Agenda June 15, 2022 9. Discussion Item: Sub -Committee Updates 7:35 P.M. Commercial: Megan and Seth ■ Megan: noted that she and Seth are considering ways to integrate sustainability into the fagade improvement program (e.g., doors and window, or lighting, etc., upgrades promote sustainability). ■ Megan: asked Kayla what the next step would be —who should Megan and Seth connect with? ■ Kayla: said she will look into the fagade program, since upgrade and code requirements will depend on scale and nature of upgrades, and will communicate what she finds to subcommittee. ■ Josh: noted that there is a business assistance program that might also be a place to get a foothold in promoting sustainable upgrades. ■ Megan: stated that subcommittee needs to channel its outreach and to consider how LSAB can help PACE. Kayla and Megan confirmed that the aim is to create a comprehensive working list of all businesses that participated in PACE and in what capacity, whether they green business members, which ones have been members in the past, which ones are B-Corporation Certified, etc. ■ Deb: noted we have a New Director of Open Space and Parks, and we will have a new Economic Vitality Director —both of whom it would be beneficial for Megan's and Seth's subcommittee to meet with. ■ Kayla: will set up a meeting with Open Space and will let LSAB know if there are opportunities for LSAB to contribute. Transportation: Tiffany and Dan ■ Both members absent. Residential: Todd and Josh ■ Josh: suggested having the City pay for more gas -powered trade -events —to offer greater incentive for residents. ■ Josh: introduced new possible initiative —of pursuing a City-wide ban on gas - powered lawn equipment; since the City would have to allow residents to use this equipment for a certain period to slowly phase them out (e.g., 2026), perhaps the ban should be implemented sooner to start the phase -out period, with substantive incentives and education initiatives. The objective would be to write an ordinance for City Council to consider, with requisite number of signatures. ■ Todd: emphasized that this would be high -impact for quality, and low -impact for residents. But before the Board considers the how, Todd asked for our initial reactions to the motivation for the initiative. ■ Lev: supported the initiative, but raised concerns about issues of social justice and NIMBY effect to less affluent communities, as well as impact on availability and cost of all -electric landscaping companies. ■ Megan: asked about enforcement, but acknowledged that this has to do with the how. 0