Comment Log Display

Dear Chairman Nichols:
I am adding my opinion to the conversation about SB 375 because I
feel it is important for individual members of the public to be
heard. I am sure you receive many comments from business interests
that would like to maintain the status quo. However, maintaining
the present "sprawl" paradigm for development is clearly not in the
interest of most Californians. Smart growth and its inherent health
and quality of life benefits clearly is in the interest of the
California public.
As I approach retirement age, I look forward to the improvements in
public transportation, air quality, and quality of life that will
accompany the implementation of SB 375. My father is still alive at
the age of 95, and can no longer drive because of a stroke. The
nearest public transportation is too distant from his residence to
be viable for him and he is isolated unless others can drive him.
He would like to be independent, and so would I if I am fortunate
enough to reach his advanced age. Two of my children and four
grandchildren live in Southern California where my wife and I are
totally dependent on the automobile when we visit. The difference
in quality of life in our children's communities from that of the
Bay Area where my wife and I live is palpable as we drive to malls,
put up with much poorer air quality, and have no destinations
within walking distance from where we stay. Implementation of the
principles of smart growth will eventually improve this situation.
I urge CARB to stand firm in the face of business interests that
oppose the proposed regional greenhouse gas emission reduction
targets. The quality of life of all Californians depends upon CARB
staying the course.
Sincerely,
John W. Schweizer, P.E.
2111 Eunice Street
Berkeley, California 94709