HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDkalkowskiph5RECEIVE D
SEP 2 0 21a .
SLO CITY CLERK
(Attachments can contain viruses that may harm your computer .Attachments may not display correctly .
Council,SloClty
From :Buzz Kalkowski [buzdna@charter .net]Sent :Sun 9/19/2010 3 :50 P M
To :Council, SloCit y
Cc :
Subject :from Buzz Kalkowski relating to the proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines - September 21s tmeetings~~t L
COUNCIL CDD DI RD2010 0901 HistPreserve .doc(38KB)dAttachments:
Z €*9 'C.t"1 RI FIN D RSunday, September 19, 2010 Izf fie'AC-M FIRE CHIE F
}Zl ATTORNEY J PW DI R
CLERK/CRIQ
0 POLICE CHs=
El DEPT HEADS
121 REC .DI R
UTI LDear Mayor Romero and Council Members,DI RIIRnlerAJt E M :S C1 CnutnlG eL
4 SW T VJOWS C N
Q
E cc,r,K,I am a Cultural Heritage Committee member asking for your support in approving the proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance an dGuidelines.
We recognize the community value in preserving historic and cultural resources . However, not every property owner may place th esame degree and respect for properties representing our community's past . One among the many intentions behind the propose dordinance, is to have effective enforcement ability when the rare and extreme violations occur and the owner-violator chooses t oignore City notices, or believes a minor penalty is but a small cost of doing business allowing for violation continuance .
I can only imagine the apparent political pressure legislative body members experience when a vocal minority expresses pronounce dopposition to proposed legislation, particularly in times preceding elections, and during difficult economic times .
However, my late-in-life municipal and county code enforcement career (following years of business work experience and busines sownership) taught me the importance of having substantial violation penalties necessary to correct extreme ordinance disregard .
In addition to stronger enforcement capabilities, the proposed ordinance provides the community with additional benefits that yo uare already familiar with .
It is with regret that I have an out-of-town commitment during this week, which includes Tuesday, September 21 st, and will not beable to attend the Council hearing . I am attaching a copy of "Viewpoint" that I wrote asking The Tribune to print, which they di d
today, Sunday, September 19th .
I am asking for your support and approval of the proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines for the benefit of th ecommunity as a whole .
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
DATE °~ 1l c) ITEM #j51
Page 1 of 2
https :1/mail . slocity .org/Exchange/slocitycouncillInbox/from%2OBuzz%20Kalkowski%20-... 9/20/2010
Page 2 of 2
Sincerely ,
Buzz Kalkowsk i
Buzz Kalkowski
2163 Augusta Cour t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
Cell phone (my only contact means during the week): 805 704-412 1
https a/mail . slocity . orglExchangelslocity councilInbox/from%20Buzz%20Kalkowski%20-... 9/20/2010
Letter to the Tribune (for Viewpoint?)
I am a Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) Member volunteer (since September 2009), a San Lui s
Obispo (SLO) homeowner, and a previous zoning enforcement officer with a Northern California city an d
with Napa County . I attended the August 26 th Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines worksho p
hosted by the Community Development Department to listen to community concerns .
San Luis Obispo was the 5th established mission of the twenty-one Alta-California Spanish missions, i n
1772, thus one of the very first European settlements in California, and was the 12 th city to be
incorporated in California (February 1856 - 481 incorporated California cities exist today).
The city-placed signs at the entries to San Luis Obispo read : "HISTORIC SAN LUIS OBISPO". The
signs are intended to encourage Highway 101 travelers to visit, to see and to experience our heritage ; and
to spend money in our city . The Mission and many of the historic structures and neighborhoods reflect a
well-preserved heritage . SLO was never a city of great mansions . It did and does reflect modest workin g
class homes providing character and history . It is easier and less expensive to maintain character than it i s
to create community character . Physical history erased is visual history departed .
An example of concern that many share : the very first motel in the world, the 1925 Motel Inn, sitting at
the east entry to the city was allowed through the years, to wither away to what little remains today .
Within the city, examples of historic structures experiencing willful deterioration can be identified . D o
we, the citizens, condone the few owners who continue the willful neglect of historic properties to th e
point of demolition for safety's sake? Do we value our history and unique sense of place created by ou r
historic structures? We, the citizens, need to weigh the facts and then decide to support or discourage th e
passage of the HPOG at the upcoming City Council meeting on September 21 S t
The main community concern expressed at the workshop related to proposed enforcement penalties ,
which potentially could be significant . Additional city revenue is not the intent of the penalties, The
prime purpose is to preserve officially listed historic resources within the city when a listed building i s
allowed to significantly deteriorate, possibly willfully, to the point where it becomes a health safety issu e
and must be torn down .
Typically when a violation is brought to the attention of the city, the city provides a written notice to th e
property, citing the violation along with the specific ordinance section(s) violated, and gives 30 days or s o
for the owner to work with the appropriate department so that eventual corrections will be made . If an
owner is verifiably financially stressed, the proposed ordinance has an economic hardship provision .
When an ordinance has minimal penalties, ignoring the ordinance, or paying a minuscule penalty can b e
an insignificant cost of doing business . An example that I can offer is a property a northern Californi a
city where I did Code Enforcement . The property had a small truss manufacturing operation ,
considerable junk, and people living in junk cars and trucks (with electrical extension cords even runnin g
through water puddles). The owner had ignored code violations going back 37 years when the city wa s
able to get a judge to conduct the trial on site . The judge, like previous judges, found the owner i n
violation, but this judge placed a substantial penalty fine, plus costs . It was at that point that the owne r
sold the property for nearly $10 million and the property was cleared of violations and junk, and high en d
apartments were built on the site . The point is that having the ability to assess a significant fine can be a
deterrent to those who would allow historic structures to be demolished by neglect .
At the workshop one person expressed concerns about the notice given to property owners . Notices of th e
Historic Preservation Ordinance hearings were all published in the Tribune (It behooves all to read the
SLO public notices printed each Saturday within the classified section). In addition, nearly 700 post car d
notices were mailed to the owners of all historically listed properties for each hearing, and email update s
were provided to anyone who expressed interest . Informational flyers were also sent to all owners o f
historic properties . Truly an effort was made to invite people to participate .
At the workshop questions were raised as to what standards are historic properties held . Virtually all
governmental agencies use the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation .
•For anyone interested in reading the standards, the website providing the standards is :
http ://www .nps .gov/history/hps/tps/tax/rhb/stand .htm .
•For preservation, restoration and reconstruction purposes use the following websites :
http :llwww .nps .gov/history/local-law/arch stnds 8 2 .htm ;
http ://www .parks .ca .gov/pages/1054/files/standards%20chartl .pdf .
Lastly, I want to convey that significant effort and time (more than one year) went into drafting th e
proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines . Our Community Development staff performe d
considerable research and thoughtful word-crafting in drafting the proposed ordinance . The State Histori c
preservation Office (SHPO); the SLO Architectural Review Committee ; and numerous entities an d
individuals, including the Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Association, reviewed the propose d
ordinance and guidelines and offered comments and suggestions . The CHC conducted numerou s
meetings to review the draft ordinance and input provided . Changes were made . The best attempts wer e
made to provide our city the best and most fair preservation ordinance possible . Your support of th e
ordinance before the City Council will be most appreciated .
Buzz Kalkowski