HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDjohnsonph1From :Shelly Johnson[SMTP :SHELLY-J@EARTHLINK .NET ]
Sent :Tuesday, October 05, 2010 1 :09 :52 A M
To :Council, SloCit y
Cc : acornejo@thetribunenews .co m
Subject :Proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guideline s
Auto forwarded by a Rule
RE E
OCT 0 5 201 0
SLO CITY CLER K
I have attached a letter that I have written expressing my concerns about the subject .
Shelly Johnso n
RED FIL E
MEETING AGENDA
DATR /o/0e .ITEM #^.,PSI
{-~h2J?COY
d'000NCIL D-ODD DI R
p'GAQ Cis?D-FIN DI R
p AGAe.~-c-1 L~'FIRE CHIE F
~~TTORNEY E3 PW DI R
CLERK/ORIG D'POLICE CH F
q DEPT HEADS O'REC DI R
P i (3 . .p'UTIL DI R
Tt <~~.._2-NR DI R
iA.-i&t.‘)T7/AE5 CuuA~'~L
SLo Crrt,A3 'Ct hl /116C
C ~~2K.
1541 Nipomo St .
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
October 4, 201 0
Dear Mayor Romero and City Council Members :
Although I have several concerns about the content of the proposed historic preservatio n
ordinance and guidelines, I am writing today to express my concern with the process o f
its creation and the speed with which the City Council is expected to make a decisio n
about it.
I request that a decision be delayed until homeowners have an opportunity to lear n
more about the proposed ordinance and guidelines that will affect them and giv e
their feedback to the council members and/or staff.
In the 248 page staff report for the item (#5) on the September 21, 2010 agenda there ar e
several descriptions of the attempts made by staff and the CHC to engage the communit y
in the process of the development of the ordinance and guidelines . They may be true a s
worded . However, in my opinion they are misleading
The "public hearings" that are described were committee meetings that were open to th e
public, but not forums for homeowners to learn about and discuss the new ordinance tha t
would affect them . The postcard notifications and brochure sent to owners of liste d
properties did not at all convey the importance of the happenings .
(I have copied below some sections of the staff report . I cannot copy only the words I
want since the report is a scanned image .)
On page 1 it says :
-upualeu guideimes ror ouncxl consideration (Attachments '/ and 8}. The CHC and Architectura l
Review Commission conducted eight public hearings and two workshops, and staff ha s
conducted numerous outreach efforts in an attempt to engage the community and incorporat e
changes supported by the CHC . In addition, the State Historic Preservation Officer has reviewe d
Page 4 says :
i Local Governments, their input was critical to the process . Over the course of the next seve n
months, the CHC hosted 8 public hearings and one special workshop event and the AR C
considered the Guidelines during a public hearing – all designed to elicit community input to th e
proposed documents . The CHC conducted hearings on the draft documents in a worksho p
format, normally during their regular meetings, with public comment and interactive discussion s
occurring as part of the proceedings . Input from the participating public was considered an d
often endorsed, and edits to the documents were made in real time as part of the proceedings i n
response .
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1
And page 5 describes the communications that went directly to the owners of "liste d
properties".
resources inventory . Postcard notifications were sent to those property owners prior to the CHC '
hearings and workshops in an attempt to generate questions, input, attendance and response . In
addition, a brochure (Attachment 2) was sent to the same list of owners to provide some basi c
information, a location where owners could find more information and a contact name, numbe r
and email address . Interested parties were added to an email list and staff provided notifications ,
links to staff reports and updates to the almost 50 names on that list. Display ads were used fo r
fw,-of t}r_n mantic nn --nil 1 1 «..-:--------- ---- ----.L1 ..-L_....--.__
I am one of the few homeowners who was aware that the new ordinance and guideline s
were being developed — at least from the time that I received the first postcard that wa s
mailed on February 26, 2010 . (I assume I received the postcard because I am an owne r
of a contributing property in Old Town .)
For your reference, the front and back of the February postcard are included below . I'v e
also included a copy of the only other postcard, sent June 16, about the consideration o f
the documents at the CHC meetings .
City of San Luis Obisp o
Community Development Departmen t
919 Palm Street . '_
3
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 'Y`
APPLICATION NUMBER: GPI 72-09
SLO City Wid e
New draft Historic Preservation ordinance and Guidelines .
For more Information go to :
www .slocity.org/communitydevelopment/Iongrange .as p
Or e-mail, jhooktslocity.org
1541 . NIPOMO ST
SLO CA 93401-4353
HEARING/ACTION DATE : March 8, 201 0
FOR QUESTIONS CONTACT :
JEFF HOOK, telittlone :1 rl I II(8(~5)I~rIi111111 1 -717 ( {II I J II J I I{II 11111111\1 11 111 ll 11 111 11 1
PLEASE READ REVERSE SIDE
016H2650 7 1-Y".0
$ 00 .28 9a02126.;201 0
i Maileo From 93 ce 1
US POSTAG E
0
003-616-018/FILE #:
JOHNSON GERALD L THE ETA L
2
city of san luis oBisp o
NOTICE OF HEARIN GCULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTE E
The Cultural Heritage Committee will conduct a hearing to consider a n
application near your property or residence . The date of the hearing and a
description of the application are printed on the other side of this card .
The hearing will be held in the Council Hearing Room (Room 9) of City Hall ,
990 Palm Street, beginning at 5 :30 p .m . The agenda will be available befor e
the meeting . Anyone is welcome to comment on the proposal . An action of
the Cultural Heritage Committee is typically a recommendation to th e
Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission or City Council, an d
therefore is not final .
City of San Luis Obisp o
Community Development Departmen t
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
PLEASE READ REVERSE SIDE
APPLICATION NUMBER : GPI 72-0 9
City-Wide, SLO
Continued discussion of the Draft Historic Preservatio n
Ordinance and Draft Update of the Historic Preservatio n
Program Guidelines
a $00 80
ns 06 :16,201 C
Masted from `.541.E
US POSTAG E
003-616-018/FILE #:
JOHNSON GERALD L THE ETA L
1541 NIPOMO ST
SLO CA 93401-435 3
HEARING/ACTION DATE : June 28, 201 0
FOR QUESTIONS CONTACT :
KIM MURRY, telepti?rw :,Iiilii7274,,1
3
The postcard says that the new guidelines would be discussed at the March 8 CH C
meeting . In fact, according to the staff report for the March 8 meeting, the ne w
documents were introduced at the January 25th CHC meeting and the review started a t
the February 22 meeting.
I was not able to attend the March 8 meeting, but was able to attend the regular March 2 2
meeting . The afternoon of that meeting I downloaded whatever information I could fin d
about the subject and was overwhelmed by the quantity of material to read . I went to th e
meeting just to try to learn what it was all about .
After sitting through several other agenda items, I watched and listened as the committe e
picked up where it had left off - displaying the draft guidelines on the screen an d
discussing the wording beginning with chapter 5 . Since I had not read the entir e
document there was no way I could understand what was taking place or make an y
meaningful comments . There were several members of the public present who wer e
prepared, with printed copies of the document, to offer suggestions, but my impressio n
was that these people were professionals who were well known to the CHC members, no t
"ordinary" homeowners .
I went to as many of the subsequent CHC meetings where the draft documents were o n
the agenda as I was able to (4/26, 5/11, 6/28 ; not 5/24) just so I could listen to th e
discussions . I still did not comprehend the content of the documents, but assumed tha t
once the committee finished working out the details they would present them to th e
community for discussion .
I never attempted to print the documents in order to study them because they were ove r
100 pages and in a constant state of flux . In addition, before the May meeting, th e
contents of the two documents were significantly rearranged .
Eventually, after the CHC finished its review of the documents, I received notification s
about a meeting on August 26 to present the draft documents to the public . (See below .)
I erroneously assumed this would be the first of several meetings to get input fro m
homeowners . Shortly before this meeting is also when I received the brochure
(attachment 2 of your report) in the mail .
A sign up sheet at this meeting provided the first opportunity I was aware of to be put o n
an email notification list . It was only because I was on the list that I was able to receiv e
some of the documentation that was given to the City Council members before thei r
September 21 meeting .
4
LCity of San Luis ObispoCommunity Development Departmen t
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
PLEASE READ REVERSE SIDE
Si io^4ai507o5 i
$ 00 .28 9
08 :12 :201 0
Z Mailed From 9 .40 1
US POSTAG E
Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Worksho p
A workshop to discuss the proposed draft Histori c
Preservation Ordinance for the City of San Luis Obisp o
will be held on Thursday, August 26, 2010, from 6 p .m. to
8 p .m ., at the Ludwick Community Center, located at 86 4
-Santa Rosa Street, San Luis Obispo .
SLO CA 93401435 3
The draft documents may be viewed online at:(~\\S
www.slodty . org/communitydevelopment
Questions? Kim Murry : kmurry@slocity.org .
li,i,,,,ii„i„III$$$$,,
Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Worksho p
CORRECTED NOTICE
City of San Luis Obispo
Our workshop notice was inadvertently printed on postcards that showed th e
start time and location for the monthly Cultural Heritage Committee meetings o n
the reverse side of the card . We apologize for the confusion and are confirmin g
the correct information below :
A community workshop to discuss proposed updates to the Historic Preservatio n
Guidelines and draft Historic Preservation Ordinance for the City of San Lui s
Obispo will be held on Thursday, August 26, 2010 from 6 p .m . to 8 p .m . at th e
Ludwick Community Center,located at 864 Santa Rosa Street (on the corne r
of Mill),San Luis Obispo .
This workshop will provide an opportunity to discuss how proposed changes ma y
impact historic structures and development in historic districts ; provide input t o
City staff; and learn about next steps in the public process .
The draft documents may be viewed on-line a t
www .slocity .orq/communitydevelopmen t
For more information, contact Kim Murry, Deputy Community Developmen t
Director, at (805) 781-7274 or kmurryaslocitv.orq
This workshop will provide an opportunity to discus s
proposed changes : provide input to City staff : and learn
about next steps in the public process .
003-616-018/FILE #:
JOHNSON GERALD L THE ETA L
1541 NIPOMO ST
5
The CHC did a very good job of gathering input from commercial interests, as is eviden t
by the quotes from the staff report below describing contacts with the Chamber o f
Commerce, local architects and realtors, but homeowners' perspectives need to b e
considered as well . In fact, in the final documents it might even be appropriate to hav e
different requirements and sanctions for residences and commercial properties .
Staff provided an overview of the proposed documents at several Chamber of Commerce an d
Downtown Association meetings, spoke at the local American Institute of Architects meeting ,
and presented at a SLO Realtors Association meeting . Attendees at these meetings include d
Please allow homeowners - not only those who are directly affected because they ow n
"listed" properties - time to learn more about the proposed ordinance and guidelines . Th e
topic is too important to be decided without more community involvement .
Sincerely,
Rochelle Johnso n
6