HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/12/2024 Item 4a, Walker, S.
From:Steven Walker <
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:Please forward to SLO City Planning Commissioners ASAP
Attachments:San Luis Obispo Planning Commissioners.pdf; Cal Poly Fraternity Addresses w
Documentation source (1).pdf; SLO CDD Legal Action for Fraternity Without Use
Permit.pdf; Complaint against Alpha Epsilon Pi for excessive noise and p.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Planning Commissioners,
I have attached a letter outlining serious issues related to fraternities and the city's zoning and land use
regulations. I realize it's a lot of information and appreciate your time to review and digest the situation
within our city's neighborhoods.
I have also attached four documents and one short video referenced in the letter.
Please feel free to reach out with any questions or comments.
Thank you,
Steve Walker
To To
help help
protprot
ect ect
your your
privapriva
10.28.2023 496 Kentucky at Stafford 9.40pm SLOPD UTL (2).mp4
cy, …cy, …
1
1
Steve and Kathie Walker
SteveWalkerSLO@gmail.com
KathieWalkerSLO@gmail.com
February 5, 2024
Timmi Tway
Community Development Department Director
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Use Permit for Alpha Epsilon Pi at 280 California Blvd, San Luis Obispo
Dear Director Tway:
This complaint is for the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity located at 280 California for excessive noise including parties
and unruly gatherings with hundreds of party guests that cause extreme disturbances in the residential
neighborhood on Hathway Avenue, Fredericks Street, and the surrounding neighborhood, in violation of their
Use Permit. The fraternity’s location is directly adjacent to a lower-density residential neighborhood and
residents live nearby who are negatively impacted by the noisy and raucous gatherings at the fraternity.
The Use Permit for the fraternity does not allow any meetings, parties or other types of activities involving
persons other than the residents living on site, limited to 19 people including the manager, between the hours
of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. (Condition #12)
Over the past year, San Luis Obispo Police Department has issued six (6) citations to Alpha Epsilon Pi at 280
California, including two (2) citations for Unruly Gatherings:
03/18/2023 10:43 a.m. Noisy Party Citation, “St. Fratty’s Day” morning
05/19/2023 10:30 p.m. Noisy Party Citation, Citation notes 250 people at the party
09/16/2023 10:15 p.m. Noisy Party Citation
10/21/2023 10:49 p.m. Unruly Gathering, Citation notes 150 people at the party
11/03/2023 12:00 a.m. Unruly Gathering
12/02/2023 10:13 p.m. Noisy Party Citation
The loud music and screaming partiers at the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity can be heard from our residence a block
away. Fraternity members and party guests often congregate in the patio and sidewalk area that abuts Hathway
Avenue at Fredericks Street, which is a residential neighborhood. The fraternity members also play drinking
games on a table in that area and can be heard from a distance. When parties and gatherings end, guests leaving
the fraternity parties loudly roam throughout the neighborhood, screaming at other guests, which further
disturbs the peace of the residents in their homes. Some of the party guests wait on the sidewalk for a ride and
loudly converse, laugh and yell while a constant stream of rideshare drivers from Uber and Lyft that park in the
middle of the surrounding streets in the neighborhood with their hazard lights on.
2
Our residential neighborhood resembles a downtown bar on these occasions and is not consistent with the Use
Permit for the fraternity property at 280 California Avenue.
According to condition #5 of Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Use Permit, if any reasonable written complaint is received by the
city related to noise or other disturbances, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. In
review of the Use Permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may
revoke the Use Permit.
We respectfully request that Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Use Permit be reconsidered based on the continual violations of
its Use Permit that have negatively impacted their neighbors.
Alpha Epsilon Pi also operates a “satellite fraternity” directly next door to the main fraternity house in a
residential home located at 331 Hathway. That location has been cited at least four times for noise disturbances
in the past year on 02/04/2023, 06/01/2023, 09/14/2023 and 10/14/2023. 331 Hathway is in an R-2 residential
zone.
Incidentally, it is a violation of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (SLOMC) 17.86.130 and San Luis Obispo’s
Land Use Regulations 17.10.020 for a fraternity, including a satellite fraternity, to operate within R-1 and R-2
residential zones in San Luis Obispo. SLOMC, Land Use section 17.156, defines “Fraternities and Sororities” as a
“Residence for college or university students who are members of a social or educational association that is
affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly and where such an association also hold meetings or gatherings.”
Alpha Epsilon Pi has meetings and gatherings at 331 Hathway Avenue including various parties and a “Game
Show” night during Rush Week on 10/13/2023.
Please let us know when the matter is scheduled for the Planning Commission hearing. Feel free to reach out if
you have any questions or need further information.
Sincerely,
Steve and Kathie Walker
Attachments: Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Use Permit
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT
ENTRY OF GUILTY/NO CONTEST PLEA - CASE NUMBER: M0001"38250
i
U�
VS CALIFORNIA,;; COURT:
:ALPHA, UPSILON / 001 ; DATE: TIME:
BE OF GOOD I OB Y ALL LAWS: CITY COUNTY STATE AND FEDERAL.
OBEY ALL LIKE VIOLATIONS.'
NOT DRIVE UNLESS PROPERLY LICENSED TO DO SO / AND INSURED.
NOT DRIVE W/B.A. OVER .00Y..
SUBMIT TO CHEMICAL TESTING UPON DEMAND OF ANY PEACE OFFICER OR
PROBATION OFFICER.
PAY FINE IN AMOUNT AND MANNER INDICATED ABOVE.
SERVE DAYS IN COUNTY .JAIL INDICATED ABOVE.
ATTEND TRAFFIC SCHOOL DWI (FIRST OFFENDER) PROGRAM
S.B. Z''S (SECOND OFFENDER) ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS.
'THEFT OFFENDER PROGRAM AS EHAVIOR PROGRAM
SUBMIT' PROOF OF ENROLLMENT WITHIN DAYS.
SUBMIT PROOF OF COMPLETION WITHIN DAYS/MONTHS.
MAKE RESTITUTION THROUGH PROBATION DEPARTMENT AS DIRECTED PLUS 10X
COLLECTION FEE.
DRIVING PRIVILEGE SUSPENDED MONTHS/YEARS.
DRIVER'S LICENSE RESTRICTED BAYS/YEARS TO DRIVING ONLY
TO AND FROM WORK IN CUORS'E--OF EMPLOYMENT
TO AND FROM TREATMENT PROGRAM
NOT DRIVE IN VIOLATION OF LICENSE RESTRICTION.
PERFORM HOURS OF VOLUNTEER COMMUNITY SERVICE, PROOF OF
COMPLETION DAYS.
REPORT TO PROBATION OFFICER AS DIRECTED.
NOT CHANGE EMPLOYMENT RESIDENCE OR LEAVE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OR STATE OF CALIFORNIA WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING PERMISSION OF THE
PROBATION OFFICER.
SEEK AND MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT, OR ENROLLMENT IN SCHOOL.
COOPERATE WITH THE PROBATION OFFICER IN PLAN FOR TREATMENT.
NOT USE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES OR FREQUENT PLACE WHERE SALE OF SAME IS
PRINCIPAL BUSINESS.
NOT USE OR POSSESS ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.
SUBMIT UPON DEMAND OF ANY PEACE OFFICER OR PROBATION OFFICER TO SEARCH
OF PERSON PERSONAL PROPERTY RESIDENCE AND/OR VEHICLE OWNED OR BEING
OPERATED AY DEFENDANT WITHOUT WARRANT AND WITHOUT NOTICE TO LOOK
FOR
0
1]
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT
ENTRY OF GUILTY/NO CONTEST PLEA — CASE NUMBER: M0001::8510
THE PEUPLL UF THE STATE OF VS �; COURT:
ALPHA, UPSILON / 001 BATE: ,/, TIME: ;
y
7 77. /
;
JUDGE: CLERK:
PROSECUTORDEFENDANT PRESENT
DEFENSE COUNSEL: J�'',C�,ll O� DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT
COURT REPORTER: > INT TYPE: NAME:
(REV=SLCR CASE:—`�0020 )
GROUNDS OF
PRIOR ALLEGED i D STRICKEN ON GROUNDS
DEFENDANT ADMITS VIOLATION OF PROBATTON AND WAIVES HEARING,
STIPULATES TO PROBABLE CAUSE.
DEFENDANT'ADVISED RE VC SECT. 21310,_S CONSEQUENCES. COURT FINDS VC2,210c;
ALCOHOL RELATED. DISTRICT ATTORNEY FILES FORM TO SUBSTITUTE CHARGES.
FINDINGS AND PROBATION REFERRAL
"PLEA OF GUILTY AND WAIVER OF RIGHTS AND ORDERS" FORM FILED.
DEFENDANT ADVISED OF AND WAIVES RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL CONFRONTATION
AND SELF INCRIMINATION AS MORE FULLY SET FORTH ON PAE—SENTENCE VOI-
DIRE AND FINDINGS ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
DEFENDANT DOES NOT WANT COUNSEL. AFTER INQUIRY COURT FINDS DEFENDANT
KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES RIGHT TO COUNSE HAVING BEEN ADVISED
OF DANGERS PITFALLS AND DISADVANTAGES OF SELF REPRESENTATION, AND
RIGHT TO UPOINTED COUNSEL IF INDIGENT.
OURT FINDS FACTUAL BASIS FOR PLEAS UILTY ON PLEA OF NO CONTEST
COURT FINDS DEFENDANT IN VIOLATION 0 ATION.
MATTER REFERRED TO PROBATION DEPARTMENT FOR PRE —SENTENCE REPORT.
PRE —SENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT DETERMINATION OF RESTITUTION.
CUURT FINDS DEFENDANT ABLE TO PAY COSTS U APPOINTED COUNSEL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $
COURT FINDS DEFLNUAR7 ABLETO PAY JAIL FEES OF 5 PER DAY.
DEFENDANT/COUNSEL WAIVES STATUTORY TIME FOR PRONOUNCEMENT= JUDGMENT.
COURT READ AND CONSIDERED THE PROBATION REPORT. DEFENDANT STATES
HE/SHE HAS READ REPORT.
`1,4 1IEFENDANT/COUNSEL STATES THERE IS NO LEGAL CAUSE WHY JUDGMENT SHOULD
Cl� NOT NOW BE PRONOUNCED.
FINE
FINE (C/T S DAYS 0 $30/DAY) SUSPENDED.
DUE BY IF ACCOUNTING FEE—$i573'30
IS PAID LIT rATIlLN15 OF $ PER MONTH
BEGINNING UNTIL PAID IN FULL.
FORTHWITH ONE DAY FOR EACH $30.
$ OF FIRE —SUSPENDED FOR EACH HOUR OF COMMUNITY SERVICE SHOWN.
DEF'ERDANT TO SERVE TIME IN LIEU OF FINE.
PROBATION GRANT / COMMITMENT
PROBATION REVOKED REINSTATED MODIFIED TERMINATED
EXTENDED =
IMPOSITION_UF SENTENCE SUSPENDED FUR YEARS S.
CONDITIONAL SENTENCE FOR ISED PROBATION.
DAYS IN CUSTODY SUSPENDED.'
DAYS IN CUSTODY (C/T/S DAYS) FORTHWITH
SERVE CONSECU /DAYS IFf=STODY.
STAY OF—EXECDTTON UNTIL AT M.
NEXT EVENT: COURT. ATE: TIME:
DEFENDANT IN CUSTODY, BAIL SET AT S < > RELEASED OR/BAIL
.. — — — — r- 4 —rs�*r —
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT
MISDEMEANOR ARRAIGNMENT MINUTE ORDER - CASE NUMBER: M0001�8250
VS L;ALIFUKNIA'; EVENT: ARRAIGNMENT
� COURT: SLO BRANCH - DIV. A '
:ALPHA, UPSILON / 001 DATE: 04/26/89 TIME: 0900
JUDGE: CLERK: cam'
PROSECUTOR: lyy� , �IEFENDANT PRESENT
:DEFENSE COUNSEL: //l_����.l�P>Za ; DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT
COURT REPORTER: ✓ `') <' `, INT TYPE: NAME:
DEFENDANT IN LU5TULlY'
,
DEFENDANT FAILED TO APPEAR COURT ORDERS THE DEFENDANT'S
OWN RECOGNIZANCE RELEASE REVOKED PROBATION REVOKED
BAIL FORFEITED NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
iMJRT ORDERS BENCH/ARREST WARRANT ISSUETF FOR DEFENDANT'S ARREST.
BAIL SET AT $ POST u FORFEIT / MANDATORY APPEARANCE NO O.R.
WARRANT ORDERER =' 4 LLED/SET ASIDE.
BA Lp RDERED R�E D/E E TED WIT TS F $
u 'gip
D FEN�A T IS INFO ED IN OPEN COURT OF THE RIGHTS S FOR TN N
CASE NO. ARN 001/ DMONITION OF RIGHTS ON FILE AND INCORPORATED
HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
DEFENDANT STATES HE/SHE UNDERSTOOD.
DEFENDANT ADVISED OF RIGHT TO PROBATION HEARING - PC1203.2(B).
INDIVIDUAL ARRAIGNMENT
DEFENDANT APPEARING IN PROPRIA PERSONA GIVEN COPY OF COMPLAINT,
STATES TRUE NAME COMhAINT AMENDED ACCORDINGLY.
DEFENDANT ADVISED OF THE CHARGES AND CONSEQUENCES, HAVING WAIVED
READING OF COMPLAINT.
PUBLIC DEFENDER APPOINTED DENIED BECAUSE DEFENDANT
HAS SUFFICIENT MORE77M PROPERTY 10 HE7AIN COUNSEL.
IT APPEARING THERE IS A CONFLICT, ATTORNEY IS APPOINTED.
DEFENDANT DOES NOT WANT TO BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. AFTER
INQUIRY THE COURT FINDS DEFENDANT KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY
WAIVES 4:IGHT TO COUNSEL- HAVING BEEN ADVISED OF DANGERS PITFALLS,
AND DISADVANTAGES OF SELF -REPRESENTATION, AND RIGHT TO APPOINTED
COUNSEL IF INDIGENT.
DEFENDANT INDICATES L WILL BE OBTAINED. ( >.
DEFENDANT APPEARINGCaITHY COUNSEL WAIVES READ
COMPLAINT AND FURTH ORMATION U CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY
RIGHTS, AND ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT OF COPIES OF COMPLAINT AND DISCOVERY
4;�_DEFENDANT/ATTORNEY ENTERS PLEA OF:
NOT GUILTY NO CONTEST
DENIES.PRIORS DENIES ENHANCEMENT ALLEGATIONS
FITTED VIOLATION OF PROBATION DENIES VIOLATION OF PROBATION
`DEFENDANT WAIVES STATUTORY TIME FOR SAL/SENTENCING.
JURY TRIAL WAIVED BY:
DEFENDANT PERSONALLY DEFENSE ATTORNEY DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
COUNTS DISMISSED ON MOTION OF
DISTRICT ATTURNEY/COURT ON GROUNDS
DEFENDANT STIPULATES TO PROBABLE CAUSE FUR ARREST.
DEFENDANT MOVES TO BE RELEASED ON O.R.: GRANTED/DENIED.
MATTER REFERRED TO PROBATION DEPARTMENT (PC 1000/1000.6/ O.R. /
REPORT/BAIL REDUCTION/PRE-SENTENCE REPORT.)
DEFENDANT ORDERED TO BE BOOKED AND RELEASED WITHIN 7 DAYS.
DISCOVERY ORDER SIGNED AND FILED.
DEFENDANT REMANDED TO CUSTODY, BAIL SET AT $
RELEASED ON OWN RECOGNIZANCE / BAIL. (REV=5=89060020
NEXT EVENT: DATE:
TIME:
COURT:
LSL151-RO46 6S5
END OF REPORT
G
3
•
SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL COURT LSL094-ROi2
REPEATER SHEET ;
DEFENDANT CASE # FILING COURT PROBATION CHARGE PLEA/
DATE BEGIN/EMU DISP ;
------------------------------------=-----------------------------------
ALPHA, UPSILON DOB= S= R= H= W= H= E=
M000138250 03/28/89 M1 SLMC17.02.030 ;
POSITIVE MATCHES
POSSIBLE MATCHES
6`5
1
JUDGE: �-
Please sign if O.R.
Please advise.
/
Lf t 7. Z 030
Z / o ✓mil
7- Z o3 0
Thank You: Date: g-
J
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
151
1
161
IT
18
19�
20
21
22
23
241
i
251
26
27
28
Office of the City .Ar.t.orn(,_\•
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Vicki J. Finucane (107.979)
990 Palm Street
P.O. Box 8100
Spin Luis Obispo. CA 93403-8100
Telephone: (805) 549-7140
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE: STATE: OF CALIFOii,"A
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
SAN LUIS OBI5Pc) 3RANCH
} I
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 1 N0. 0 ��
)
vs. } COMPLAINT -CRIMINAL
I
ALPHA UPSILON. I Count 1
I ..
Defendant(s). 1 "
)
VICKI J. FINUCAN£. ACTING CITY ATTORNEY. of the San Luis Obispo City
Attorney's Office. complains and accuses defendant. ALPHA UPSILON, on
information and belief. of the crime described as follows:
Count 1: On or about the 26th day of February, 1989. at and in the
City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo. State of California,
defendant did commit a misdemeanor. a violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code §17.02.030 and,§17.02.010, i.e., did wilfully use or cause or permit to
be used a structure in the City of San Luis Obispo in violation of zoning
regulations, to -wit: use of 720 and 726 Foothill as a fraternity without
appropriate use permit. all of which is contrary to the statute in such cases
made and provided, and against the peace and dignity'of the People of the
V
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
State of California.
Usti this �� ���ia�l of March, 1989, ii1 the City of San Luis Obispo.
.'�.tlifornia, 1 certify under penalty of per.j.ury that T.he fc,regoinK is true and
correct.
7
Vicki .1. Fi-n' ane
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
C
J
•
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Office of the City Attorne%-
(:ITY OF SAY LUIS OKSPO
Vicki J. Finucane (1079791
990 Palm Street
P. 0. Box 8100
Sain Luis Obispo. CA 93403-8100
Telephone: (805) 549-71-40
MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
SAN LUIS OBISPO BRANCH
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE: OF CALIFORNIA, ) %0.
vs. ) DECLARATION I\ SUPPORT
OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
ALPHA UPSILON, )
Defendant(s). )
)
THE UNDERSIGNED hereby declares:
THAT I am now employed as a Police Officer for the CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO. in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California.
THAT an investigation has been conducted to determine if defendant.
ALPHA UPSILON,. did commit the crime of !MISDEMEANOR: violation of §17.02.030
and•.§ 17.'�'9.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (use of structure in
violation of zoning regulations).
YOUR DECLARANT has reviewed the report of this investigation and
declares upon information and belief that the facts herein show probable
cause that the aforementioned fraternity did commit the hereinbefore stated
crime.
C�,'
'01
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"FiFF AVESTIGATION REPORT N Ittacled hereto in supporl or this
declaratfun and is incorporatev by ryference herein, your deciarant Lherefore
r"qumsts the issuance of a warranL or arrest., if defenda"L do"S not appear.
voiuntarily in response to appearance lerrer.
declare under pehalty "f p"rjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
DATED: 3- 7- -7 —. 19R9. San Luis Obispo. California.
Declarant 1. S. Parkinson
- 2 -
REP
San Luis ObispoEPoliceTDepartment
DR# 89060020
Report Date: 03-08-89 Report ID# 68654.,A67867 IN # 68654
SECTION OFFENSE DESCRIPTION
CO MISC CITY ORDINANCES
17.02.030 MC
OCC.ON:
or BTWN:
REPORTED:
Date. Time
02-26-89 12:00
03-01-89 14:29
FELONY ( ) MISDEMEANOR (X) TYPE OF REPORT OFFICE
CONNECTING REPORTS: FIELD ( } INF ( ) PHONE (X)
DETAILS OF CRIME
MO: NIGHT TIME, LOUD NOISE
Motive: CREATE DISTURB, PARTY
Location: 720 FOOTHILL
Type Premises: SINGLE RES
Type Property:
Veh used by S/:
ADDITIONAL PEOPLE INVOLVED
CODE: V=Vict, W=Wit, C=Comp, P=Parent, G=Guardian, S -Subj, S=Susp
Code: RP Name: BONIN__AL----------------- ----- ----------------------
dr: 272 DEL MAR CSZ: DOB:
CAL
Age: Sex: Race: HP: ( )543-6200 WP:
Eyes: Hair: Wt: Ht:
Emp: OWNER APT. COMPLEX Aix
K :
-------------------_-------------------- - -- -------------------------
Code: W1 Name MCDANIEL GREG P. iB: 07-04-65
Addr: 140 FERRINI #9 CSZ_SLO, CA
Age: 23 Sex: Race: HP:
Eyes: Hair: Wt: Ht:
-Emp: APT _MGR-------------...------ ----
Code: W2 Name: MCDANIEL, VICKY F.
Addr: 140 FERRINI #9
Age: 21 Sex: Race: HP:
Eyes: Hair: Wt: Ht:
Veh:
Emp: APT MGR
---------------------
)54b-95U4 WF: ( ) -
%7
-A--'---------- ry--------
DOB: 06-`1' 7CA-
)546-9504 WP:
A AKA:
--------------------------------------
The Details can be found on a Continuation Sheet attached to this report.
(!2sor ID# Repovting Officer(s)ID Assmt. Rep. O f. Signature
-----_ LTZLjQ ------- --
Assigned to:ID# Assmt. Date/Time Processed by D Clk
ther action Yes- No
,pies to: Detecttve Juvenile %A C A -- SO/PD
DOJ Patrol AC 0 r
Case Disp. Except —wrrest -Unfounded Active
}
SA JIS OBISPO DISTRICT ATTOI
PROMIS WITNESS LIST
----------------------------=-----------------------------------------------
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT CASE #: 89060020 D.A. #
-----------------------------------------------------
LAW ENFORCEMENT WITNESSES
NAME: Parkinson, I. S. SLOPD 67867
---------------------------------------------
OTHER WITNESSES
1 Name: BONIN, AL DOB: Addr:272 DEL MAR
Sex: Race: HP:5436200 WP: CSZ SLO, CA
----------------------------------------=-------------------------------------
WT RTS INT Y N SUBPOENA INSTR. R B 1 2 3 4$
2-Name MCDANIEL,-GREG P DOB 07-04-65 Addr:14.0 FERRINI #9 ---
Sex: Race: HP:5469504 WP: CSZ : SLO, CA
- - -- - -- - - - - - - - ----- ------- - - - - --- - - - - - - - - -- -- - -•�- -•• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WT RTS INT Y N SUBPOENA INSTR. R B 1 2 3 4 5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Name: MCDANIEL, VICKY F. DOB: 06-11-61 Addr_:140 FERRINI #9
Sex: Race: HP:5469504 WP: CSZ : SLO, CA
WT RTS INT Y N SUBPOENA INSTR. R B 1 2 3 4 5
0
OSAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
CA0400600
CRIME REPORT
89060020
SOURCE:
On 3/1/89 at approx 1429 hrs, I was dispatched to 140 Ferrini #9,
regarding SUB/s at that location desiring to file a complaint
against nearby fraternity.
PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT.:
Upon arrival, I contacted the RP/BONIN, W/Greg McDANIEL, and
W/Vicky McDANIEL. BONIN, who is the property owner, and Vicky
and Greg McDANIEL, who are the property mgrs, stated they have
been having a problem with the fraternity Alpha Upsilon, located
at 720 Foothill. They stated they've had continuous noise
problems, party problems, and they are continually disturbing the
occupants of their apts. They stated they have talked with
numerous people regarding this problem which included talking to
the attorney, PD, Planning Dept, and City Council members. They
stated last time the fraternity had a rush week, they held all
their rush parties at their location, 720 Foothill. They stated
they talked about this with the City and the City stated they
would no longer be holding their parties there w/o a use permit.
BONIN stated last time they announced on their flyer that the
parties would be held at that location and subsequent to that
they complained to the City about it.
They said this time they got ahold of one of the rush bulletins
and it stated that the locations of the last 4 events would be to
be announced. He stated the first event that was marked to be
announced was Sunday, 26th, and that was held at the fraternity,
720 Foothill. They took several photos of that incident, and in
the photos showed rush signs on the lawn and beer signs
throughout the yard. He stated they were extremely loud,
partying and drinking throughout the night and later on the
evening took 2 kegs of beer and climbed over through their
property, leaving.
He stated that last night, Tuesday, 2/28, the event was noted to
be to be announced, was also held at the residence.
All 3 SUB/s stated this is an on -going problem and the fraternity
has found a way to circumvent the City's use permits and is still
having their fraternity rushes and parties at the residence. They
requested that a rpt be written and they strongly request a
Ocomplaint against the fraternity.
1
�j SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
CA0400600
CRIME REPORT
89060020
I requested that Of. HUBBARD on night watch attempt to photograph
any possible rush parties that evening. The reason for this was
they indicated on their flyer that they were intending to have
another one that evening. The following day I talked with Of.
HUBBARD who advised that there was a function happening at the
residence. He advised he observed SUB/s inside the residence and
2 SUB/s standing out front near the front door. He stated the
SUB/s out front were dressed in coat and tie and had some
clipboard and appeared to be checking off names as people
arrived. He stated there was no noise violation; however, he did
take several photographs from me of the event. The film was
retained by myself and submitted to Tech KLASEY for developing.
DISPOSITION:
Active. Submit to .City Attorney for complaint.
PARKINSON, 67867, AF, 3/8/89, 1030 hrs
2
JUDITH LAUTNER
As ate Planner Planning Division
11 city of
san LUIS OBISp0
community De"elopment Department - (805) 549-7166
990 Palm Si. - P.O. Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, cA 93403.8100
0
0
City of San Luis Obispo
Planning Department
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo. Ca 93401
Dear Planning Staff.
" l To RCG(�:P' nCZZUtZ
RcCE1VtD
OCT Z 1988
C if.;1 V eCOMW
This lever is conceming Alpha Upsilon Fraternity's recent purchase of the property
located at 720 and 726 Foothill Boulevard. It has been our full intention from the start to
obtain a use permit to function at this property. This was also was a major factor in our
decision to purchase the property. We feel this location is ideal for a fraternity use due to its
zoning (R-4), proximity to Cal -Poly, and its relationship to surrounding properties.
We have been actively working towards submitting a use permit application and
recently met with City Planning Director, Mike Multari, to discuss our possible options. Our
housing committee is currently consulting with architects on the development plans for this
parcel. in this process we hope to mitigate neighborhood concerns such as noise and parking.
There recently has been a great deal of concern over publications announcing rush
functions at this address. These flyers were printed before we realised all the problems with
holding fraternity functions at this location- 'Ibis problem.has been corrected. and we fully
intend to hold no functions at this address.
We are confident that we can work with the neighborhood and the city to reach a
positive solution for a fraternity use of the property. We will inform you of the progress on
our application, and weencourage you to call us with any concerns you may have.
Sincerely.
Z ,
G
Scott Moran
Vice -President
Alphl Upsilon Fraternity
1/ . , .
James Hendrickson
Housing Chairman
Alpha Upsilon Fraternity
011
161
om it M�; Co'�cern;
On the x.urnl7j sf |1arch �, 1989. l was awa�ened �i
|oud ruckue outsido m� window- to F.
my app-artment'
Upon investigatzng the soise, l found two men in t�e
process of moving �everal beer k�os over the apartment
fence' I asked them whai they ere doing and they said that
they were �lpha Up�z.,�lon t4ge- and had to take the kegs,
.one produced his plr�dge cI o�'plained to them tnat
they preunks on our propert/,
that ��e� �ere ��sturbing �enants and, that the-, were
.respassin.g' 1 ther asked to remove the kegs from our
�ropert;, The. replied y could not; they we�s
j.)ledging'
The Lwo p1.edqes csnt ed with their p,r-ank, were' not
c�oPera���e in �he 1east and carried the kegs across ��_,r
comple= �a� out �c � wait-:-,- car �n the street'
°
�
i._
N
•
7�
le
^C^
40 CD
0
ca T
coCD
W
.�r
MW6 cx:>
�'
0
O
LU
o
c
�
z
cn
0
Zo
1 `
E
T
�
N
W t.
_c
Q
o
w
c
z
w
w
C
0
0
66
E
a
0
00
E
jkjd%*dser
w 7.
low
0
J
Division I. Zoning Code
Chapter 17.02
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sections:
17.02.010
Title.
17.02.020
Purpose.
17.02.030
General requirement.
17.02.040
Interpretation.
17.02.050
General plan consistency —
Regulations interpretation and
application.
17.02.010 Title.
This division shall be known and cited as the
"zoning regulations of the city." (Ord. 941 § i
(part), 1982: prior code § 9201.1)
17.02.020 Purpose.
These regulations are intended to guide the
development of the city in an orderly manner,
based on the adopted general plan, to protect
and enhance the quality of the natural and built
environment, and to promote the public health,
safety and general welfare by regulating the use
of land and buildings and the location and basic
form of structures. (Ord. 941 § 1 (part), 1982-
prior code § 9201.2)
17.02.030 General requirement.
Land or buildings may be used and structures
may be erected or altered only in accordance
with these regulations. (Ord. 941 § I (part), 1982:
prior code § 9201.5)
17.02.040 Interpretation.
A. Ambiguity. The director shall interpret
these regulations, subject to the appeal pro-
cedures of Chapter 17.66. Written requests for
interpretation shall be responded to in writing
within ten days and shall become part of the
permanent files of the community development
department.
17.02.010-17.02.050
B. Zone District Boundaries.
1. Boundaries between zoning districts gen-
erally follow lot lines or their extensions, phys-
ical features, or contour lines, as noted on the
official zoning map. Boundaries adjoining
streets shall be assumed to follow the centerlines
of streets if such location becomes an issue in the
use of private property, as when a street is aban-
doned. Zones which meet a street centerline
shall not be considered "adjacent."
2. The location of boundaries which are not
readily determined by inspection of the official
zone map shall be determined by the director.
C. Conflict with Public Provisions. These
regulations are not intended to interfere with or
annul any other law or regulation. Where these
regulations impose a restriction different From
any other law or regulation, the more restrictive
shall apply.
D. Conflict with Private Provisions. These
regulations are not intended to interfere with or
annul any easement, covenant, or other agree-
ment between private parties. Where these reg-
ulations impose a restriction different from a
private agreement, the provisions which are
more restrictive or which impose higher stand-
rds shall control. (Ord. 941 § I (part), 1982: prior
code § 9204.5)
17.02.050 General plan consistency —
Regulations interpretation and
application.
The regulations codified in this title shall be
interpreted and applied in a. manner consistent
with the general plan. (Ord. 941 § I (part), 1982:
prior code § 9204.1)
425 (San Luis Obispo 7484)
�I C� ® sAn 1S om �,S
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
(8115) 549-7140
March 28. 1989
Scott Moran
Vice President
Alpha Upsilon Frat.ervit.y
720 Foothill Blvd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Violation of Municipal Code §§. 17..02.030 and 17.02.010
Gentlemen:
This is to advise you that a complaint has been filed against the
Alpha Upsilon Fraternity in the San Luis Obispo Municipal Court, Criminal
Division, for violation of the above -.referenced code sections. Your
arraignment has been scheduled for Wednesday, April 26. 1989, at 9:00 a.m.
in the Municipal Court. Division A. at 1050 Monterey Street. San Luis
Obispo_ Please plan to have a representitive of Alpha Upsilon present at
that time.
Please cal! if you have an\� questions.
Very truly yours.
Vicki J. wcane
Acting City Attorney
VJF:sw
Enclosure.
cc: Municipal Court -Criminal Division
0 [F-l:arraignl
CAL POLY SLO FRATERNITY HOUSES1
Fraternity, # members Address Status of Operation Documentation2
Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd (R4) USE PERMIT (U1099) 8/2/1983 AB 524 list +
331 Hathway Ave (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
Alpha Sigma Phi 1218 Bond Street (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
299 Albert Drive (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
Beta Theta Pi 1327 E. Foothill Blvd (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list +
1220 Fredericks St (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
556 Hathway (R2) (per Kappa Kappa Gamma, CP list 5/18/2023) AB 524 list
68 Chorro (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION - Anholm AB 524 list +
Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Place (R4) USE PERMIT (U 106-98) 8/12/1998 AB 524 list +
1270 Fredericks (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New 2023, Rush Events
Delta Upsilon 720 E. Foothill Blvd (R4) USE PERMIT (U 36-09) 6/24/2009 AB 524 list +
1700 Fredericks (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
281 Albert (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
388 Chaplin (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
1555 Slack (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
Kappa Sigma 108 Crandall Way (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list
322 Hathway (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
281 Hathway (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
526 Kentucky (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
1990 McCollum (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
1142 Montalban (T-C) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Commerical AB 524 list
293 Albert (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista Social media post+
1861 Hope (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 Foothill Blvd (R4) NO USE PERMIT FOR 1264 FOOTHILL AB 524 list +
USE PERMIT FOR 1292 Foothill (U-109 05) occupied by Sigma Nu, permit stays w/address
1241 Monte Vista (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list
1243 Monte Vista (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list
171 Orange (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
12 Hathway (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
253 Albert Drive (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023- Rush +
278 Albert Drive (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
285 Chaplin (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista
1 Houses located in residential zones R-1 and R-2 zones are highlighted in yellow
2 “AB 524” means the address is listed on Cal Poly Greek Life website, AB 524 Sorority & Fraternity Transparency Act Report, where a
‘sanctioned event’ was held; “+” symbol means that the fraternity advertised the address on social media for rush events, there are
photos of fraternity with their Greek letters at the property address, etc.
All this evidence is included in the Cal Poly Fraternity and Neighborhood Impact Report.
178 Chaplin (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
Phi Delta Theta 470 Grand Ave (R1) ILLLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH Social media post +
260 Chaplin Ln (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New 2023 – Rush Event +
251 Highland Dr (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – N of Foothill Rush Event +
568 Ellen Way (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – SR Park Area Rush Event +
Phi Gamma Delta 1254 Bond (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
1256 Bond (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
385 Chaplin (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
1229 Fredericks St. (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New 2023, Rush Event +
Phi Kappa Psi 1335 E. Foothill (R4) USE PERMIT (U 47-10) 6/13/2013 AB 524 list+
237 Albert Drive (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
2061 Hope (R-1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH New 2023, Rush Event +
1271 Stafford (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023 +
1273 Stafford (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023 +
1275 Stafford (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023 +
346 Grand (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list
1740 Fredericks (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
Phi Sigma Kappa 348 & 350 Hathway (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
1908 Loomis (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list +
Pi Kappa Phi 740 W. Foothill Blvd (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list +
2090 Hays (R1) (2023 became Sigma Phi Epsilon) AB 524 list
134 Orange Dr (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista
447 N. Chorro (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – N of Foothill 2023 Rush Event +
66 Rafael Way (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – S of Foothill 2023 Rush Event +
Sigma Nu 1304 Foothill Blvd (R4) USE PERMIT (U1484) 05/08/1991 AB 524 list
1292 Foothill (R4) USE PERMIT (U-109 05) see Lambda Chi Social media post +
301 Hathway (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
248-250 Grand Ave (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list +
1621 McCollum (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
290 Chaplin (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista Social media post +
Sigma Phi Epsilon 2090 Hays (R-1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH New 2023 Rush Event +
1725 Santa Barbara3 ILLEGAL LOCATION AB 524 list
Sigma Pi 1525 Slack (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
3 Sigma Phi Epsilon relocated to 2090 Hays. It’s unclear if they still occupy 1725 Santa Barbara.
124 Stenner (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list +
Theta Chi 1238 E. Foothill (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list
1441 Slack (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
496 Kentucky (R2) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023 Rush Event +
1350 Stafford (R2)4 ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista New in 2023 Rush Event +
1820 Hope (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list
410 Grand Ave (R1)5 ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH New in 2023 +
191 Kentucky (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
2149 Santa Ynez (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list
1661 McCollum (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list
Zeta Beta Tau 654 Graves (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list +
658 Graves (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list +
286 California (R4) NO USE PERMIT – Alta Vista
1928 Garfield (R4) NO USE PERMIT AB 524 list
244 Albert Drive (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Alta Vista AB 524 list +
2044 Loomis (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list
1841 Slack (R1) ILLEGAL LOCATION – Lower MH AB 524 list
Alpha Gamma Rho 132 California Blvd (R4) USE PERMIT (U 144-97) 12/10/1997
(Not in Good Standing with Cal Poly, Suspended until Fall 2025 *)
*SLOMC 17.86.130 Fraternities and Sororities:
A. 3. The fraternity or sorority shall remain affiliated and in good standing with the Interfraternity
Council of Student Life and Leadership at California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. If the
fraternity or sorority becomes unaffiliated or no longer held in good standing with California Polytechnic
University, the conditional use permit shall be revoked.
4 Located next to 496 Kentucky, 1350 Stafford is the 2-story building with Greek letters (for Theta Chi) mounted on top level of
building as shown in photos in the Cal Poly Fraternity Neighborhood Impact Report.
5 Located across the street from 1820 Hope, both have Theta Chi flags
1
San Luis Obispo City Planning Commissioners,
Imagine how you would feel if a big group of college-aged guys moved into the house next door to yours, in a
lower density R-1/R-2 residential neighborhood, then attached Greek letters on their house or a fraternity flag
on their flagpole, and began hosting large gatherings with blaring music, screaming guests, frequent drinking
games with chanting, cheering and profanity. Parades of people come and go from Thursday through Saturday,
stumbling by your house and shouting until 2 a.m. Rideshare drivers park in the road while loud, intoxicated
guests load into and out of their cars throughout the night. Your yard is used as a bathroom for urine and vomit,
and a trash can for discarded empty cans and bottles. The quiet enjoyment of your property is destroyed.
Now imagine another nearly identical group of guys moving in across the street, too. And another one four doors
down. And another three doors down, across the street. And another on the street behind you. And so on.
This has happened to me and my family in our Alta Vista neighborhood near Cal Poly and has completely
disrupted our lives over the past several years. Many of the long-term residents in our neighborhood, including
former mayor/current city council member Jan Marx, gave up, sold their houses, and moved to quieter areas of
the city. Ms. Marx did not realize that the satellite fraternity houses that surrounded her home at 265 Albert
Drive were prohibited from operating in her R-1 zoned residential neighborhood, according to the San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code (SLOMC) and zoning regulations. Unfortunately, the laws were not enforced by the city.
In 2022, the New Times featured another neighbor, Kai Martin, who lived in the Monterey Heights
neighborhood, across Grand Avenue to the east of our Alta Vista neighborhood. He also did not realize that the
satellite fraternity house next door to him was prohibited from operating in his R-1 neighborhood. He only knew
that SLOPD was not much help, despite his repeated noise complaints, and that his living situation had become
untenable. (https://www.newtimesslo.com/news/nuisance-on-the-block-slos-long-term-residents-and-students-
struggle-to-see-eye-to-eye-12546807) After the article was published, Kai and his wife sold their house on Hope
Street to an investor who, ironically, leased it to a fraternity.
2
Most of the long-term residents who remain in our neighborhood cannot simply sell their homes and relocate.
But the constant noise and other issues of living near dozens of illegal fraternity houses is a complete nightmare.
We hope the city will do something to enforce its laws and regulations.
I am a first-responder, EMS helicopter pilot and work 12 to 14-hour shifts for seven days straight, alternating
weeks. My base is at Paso Robles airport which is about a 40-minute commute from our home. That leaves me
limited time between my shifts to shower, eat, and sleep. It is imperative that I get adequate rest so I can safely
transport my medical crew and patients, but that has been nearly impossible with the noisy fraternity parties
near our home every weekend that Cal Poly is in session. It has also affected my wife, Kathie, and our teenage
son. He has missed important morning classes at SLOHS because he is kept awake at night by loud fraternity
parties and other late-night fraternity activities.
Kathie and I have repeatedly called SLOPD to report the loud parties, but nothing has changed. We became
familiar with the city ’s noise ordinance, that prohibits amplified noise from crossing the residential property line
from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. and prohibits noise that is “plainly audible at a distance of 50-feet from the noisemaker ”
from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. (SLOMC 9.12.050) We began paying attention to the SLOPD dispatch log and noticed that
the loud fraternity parties we were calling into SLOPD were often cleared with a “Negative Violation” (NV),
“Unable to Locate” (UTL), or “No Report” which means the party wasn’t a cited.
We also noticed that much of the time, a non-sworn, college-student officer from the Student Neighborhood
Assistance Program (SNAP) responded to the parties and cleared them with a NV or No Report. SNAP officers are
not authorized to issue noise citations but can give a Disturbance Advisement Card (DAC) which is a warning
without a monetary fine. Once a property receives a DAC, it goes on the “no warning” list and thereafter, a
SLOPD officer will respond to a noise complaint for 9 months from the last noise citation.
We later learned that SNAP officers are also not authorized to respond to fraternities and fraternities are not
eligible for a DAC. A noise complaint for a fraternity requires a response from SLOPD.
The problem is that only seven fraternity houses are operating legally, in an authorized R-3/R-4 zone with a use
permit, whereas there are approximately 80 documented fraternity houses in the city. There are 18 fraternities
in Cal Poly’s Interfraternity Council (IFC) and most fraternities have multiple houses that have regular fraternity
parties and other fraternity events. Many of the main chapter houses are in R-1/R-2 residential neighborhoods. I
want to emphasize that so-called “satellite” fraternity houses operate as full-fledged fraternity houses with
enormous raucous parties, DJs, drinking games, etc. When the weather is nice, they host raging daytime parties
that they call a “dayge” and often feature inflatable water slides, booming music and screaming all day. When I
am working nightshift, it is impossible to sleep during the weekend with these daytime parties.
We began documenting the noisy fraternity parties near our home with video and sent the video to SLOPD with
a question about why they were not being cited. Initially, a SLOPD night watch commander took responsibility for
the mistakes and reassured us that the officers were being educated about the city’s noise ordinance.
Unfortunately, the night watch commander left his position after two months. The noisy fraternity parties
continued nearly every weekend, and they often were not cited.
We felt as though SLOPD’s failure to cite the parties sent a permissive message, and it’s no surprise that the
fraternity parties and illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhood increased exponentially over the past few
years.
3
Kathie reached out to Cal Poly’s Greek Life and was told that fraternity operations within the city limits are not
Cal Poly’s responsibility and suggested she contact SLOPD and/or Code Enforcement. Kathie contacted John
Mezzapesa, the code enforcement supervisor for the city, and he explained:
1. The SLOMC/zoning regulations only allow fraternities and sororities to operate in R-3 and R-4 zones.
They are prohibited in all other zones, including R-1 and R-2 residential neighborhoods.
2. The SLOMC Land Use (Chapter 17.156) defines a fraternity or sorority as a “Residence for college or
university students who are members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good
standing with the California Polytechnic State University and where such an association also holds
meetings or gatherings.”
3. Fraternities and sororities are required to have a use permit. Use permits outline the terms of the
fraternity operation, including occupancy limits, whether parties are allowed, etc.
Mr. Mezzapesa provided the seven use permits for the fraternities operating in San Luis Obispo. He also
explained it is difficult to prove that a fraternity is operating at an address if the tenants and/or property owners
deny they are a fraternity. This is frustrating because fraternities post photos of parties or dates of events and
gatherings at their addresses in our neighborhood on social media, while denying that they are operating as a
fraternity. Some examples are Sigma Nu next door to us at 1267 Fredericks Street, Delta Chi across the street at
1270 Fredericks Street, Beta Theta Pi at 1220 Fredericks Street, and Phi Gamma Delta at 1229 Fredericks Street.
Sigma Nu moved out of 1267 Fredericks, but the other fraternities listed continue to operate illegally.
Kathie submitted public records requests to Cal Poly for the addresses of their fraternity houses, including
satellite houses, within San Luis Obispo. Cal Poly denied her public records requests. First, they cited privacy
concerns but caselaw overcame that argument. On her second request, they claimed fraternities are
independent organizations from Cal Poly. This is also untrue. Her only option is to file a writ with the court.
Assembly Bill 524: The Campus Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act
Meanwhile, the California legislature was working to pass Assembly Bill 524: The Campus Recognized Sorority
and Fraternity Transparency Act. AB 524 requires all colleges and universities to publish an annual report with
information about their fraternities and sororities, including the addresses of the “sanctioned events” held by
the organizations on the campus’s Greek Life webpage. Sororities have limitations on hosting parties, therefore
4
most of the sanctioned events held by Greek Life are at fraternities, including satellite fraternity houses. AB 524
passed in 2022 and mandated the AB 524 Reports to be published on October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter.
During discussion and debate of AB 524, the California legislature found that it does not violate the student’s
privacy rights to publish the address of their fraternity houses and locations of sanctioned fraternity events.
In 2022-2023, Kathie researched each of the Cal Poly fraternities and located the addresses of dozens of
fraternity houses based on their social media posts that advertise fraternity events, such as Rush Week activities,
at their fraternity house locations. She was able to document at least 40 illegal fraternities in R-1/R-2 zones in
our Alta Vista neighborhood, and at least 10 illegal fraternities in the lower Monterey Heights neighborhood.
When Cal Poly published their AB 524 Report online, Kathie cross-referenced the addresses she had identified
with those on the AB 524 Report and they were the same, which confirmed the locations of the fraternities.
This academic year, 2023-2024, more fraternity houses began branching out into the neighborhoods west of
Santa Rosa Street and several others popped up in our neighborhood including two compounds where multiple
houses located together are fraternities: Theta Chi on the corner of Kentucky and Stafford (496 Kentucky & 1350
Stafford); and Phi Kappa Psi at 1251, 1253 and 1257 Stafford, are two examples.
Kathie prepared a report with each fraternity house location, documentation about their operations, including
photos of Greek letters at their homes, advertisements of Rush Week at specific addresses, and other evidence
to show the illegal fraternity locations. She gave the report to Timmi Tway and John Mezzapesa during a meeting
on 11/8/2023.
Our elderly neighbor who has lived in their home on Stafford Street since the 1950s, reached out to Kathie last
year because they were distressed to realize that a fraternity was occupying the house next door to them at
1350 Stafford. Kathie contacted Mr. Mezzapesa on the neighbor’s behalf and the city contacted the
tenants/property owner at 1350 Stafford. The fraternity took the Greek letters down but continues to have loud
fraternity parties which we can hear from our house on Fredericks Street. We’ve witnessed many very noisy
parties at 1350 Stafford and there’s always a group of fraternity guys guarding the front door. It appears they are
hosting a sorority based on guests coming and going. We’ve seen SNAP officers respond to multiple loud parties
at that address but repeatedly clear them as “Negative Violation”.
5
Every year, more fraternity houses are established in lower density residential neighborhoods in the city. There
are currently approximately 80 documented Cal Poly fraternity houses. 61 fraternities are illegally located in R-1
and R-2 neighborhoods and 12 fraternities are operating illegally in R-3 and R-4 zones without a use permit. Only
7 fraternities are operating legally, with use permits although one of those is suspended from Cal Poly, which is
grounds for loss of the use permit according to the SLOMC. (See Attachment: “Cal Poly Fraternity Addresses w
Documentation Source”)
Lack of Oversight by the City of San Luis Obispo
Obviously, we did not get here overnight but the problem with illegal fraternity houses in residential
neighborhoods has grown exponentially over the past several years because the zoning laws have not been
enforced by the city of San Luis Obispo.
I think it’s important to acknowledge that historically, San Luis Obispo did enforce their zoning ordinance
pertaining to the operation of fraternities in the city. The Community Development Department (CDD), SLOPD,
and the city attorney worked together to ensure compliance, without hesitation or delay. I have attached one
example from about 35 years ago. (See Attachment: “SLO CDD Legal Action for Fraternity Without Use Permit”)
Within one month of a neighbor complaining to the CDD about an unpermitted fraternity house at 720 Foothill
which is zoned R-4, the city went to the property then sent a letter to the fraternity telling them that they must
immediately apply for a use permit. The fraternity failed to apply for a use permit and continued to host parties.
Five months later, a frustrated neighbor contacted SLOPD, and an officer took a report and prepared a sworn
declaration for the city attorney. The city attorney filed a criminal complaint against the fraternity in municipal
court for operating without a use permit. The fraternity was arraigned a month later, fined, placed on probation
and ordered to apply for a use permit within 30 days.
When we bought our property over 15 years ago, there was a mix of residents in our neighborhood, including
young and older professionals, college students, retirees, etc. We formed good relationships with our student
neighbors. A few fraternities were operating illegally on Hathway Avenue which is zoned R-1/R-2 but there were
no others in any area of our neighborhood. Presumably, the city knew about the illegal fraternities on Hathway.
Through her research, Kathie found a report prepared by Cal Poly in 2015 after the roof collapsed on St. Frattys
Day, 3/7/2015, when the roof of a garage on Hathway Avenue. The report was submitted to the city of San Luis
Obispo, and it was attached to an Agenda Report for the City Council. City management was aware of the
report’s findings which states that St. Fratty’s Day was founded in 2009 by the fraternity at “the pink house” at
348 Hathway. It also says the party was fueled by other fraternities on Hathway Avenue.
SLOPD was also familiar with the illegal fraternity houses on Hathway because they were dispatched to obvious
fraternity parties throughout this time.
The city did not take any action to shut down the illegal operation of the fraternity at 348 Hathway, which is
zoned R-2, or other known fraternities on Hathway such as 301 Hathway (R-2) and 281 Hathway (R-1) despite Cal
Poly’s report after roof collapse and SLOPD’s knowledge of their existence. This lack of oversight has led rapid
expansion of dozens of illegal fraternities in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo in less than a
decade. It has driven out permanent residents and changed the fabric of our neighborhood to the point that it
is impossible to rest Thursday through Sunday while Cal Poly is in session.
Aside from St. Fratty’s Day which had 7,000 people converging into our neighborhood this year, the illegal
fraternities have also caused the evolution of “Halloweekend” when thousands of people overtake our
6
neighborhood on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights nearest to October 31st. The fraternities host costume
parties with blaring music each night. Equally disruptive are the loud parades of people walking from one
fraternity party to the next, screaming to each other across the road or down the block. It is absolute hell for
three nights. Many Cal Poly students posted about the event on the social media platform Yik Yak:
SLOPD is overwhelmed and seems unable to handle the sheer number of parties and people during
Halloweekend. According to SLOPD’s dispatch log, during last year’s Halloweekend, 10/26 – 10/29/2023, there
were 120 calls to SLOPD for noisy parties. SNAP issued 30 DACs and 75 calls were cleared as Negative Violations
(NV), No Report, or Unable to Locate (UTL). Of the 120 calls, SLOPD wrote 15 citations.
I want to cover just one of over a dozen parties we witnessed and documented that were not cited by SLOPD
during Halloweekend. On 10/28/2023, there was a loud party at the illegal fraternity, Theta Chi, on the corner of
Kentucky and Stafford (496 Kentucky and 1350 Stafford.) SLOPD was called at 8:30 p.m. for the noisy party and
SLOPD cleared the call as a “Negative Violation”.
At around 9:30 p.m. someone else in the neighborhood called to report a “large party at Kentucky and Stafford”.
SLOPD cleared the call at 9:32 p.m. “Unable to Locate” even though it was an obvious party with people spilling
out of the house and onto the sidewalks on Kentucky and Stafford.
Minutes later, at around 9:38 p.m. we drove over to the party location at Kentucky and Stafford -around the
corner from our house- and saw a lot of people in the yard and around the house on the corner of Kentucky and
Stafford. One person was plugging her ears because it was so loud. We took video of the situation and Kathie
called SLOPD to report the party. The dispatcher asked her to clarify that there was a party because it had just
been cleared by SLOPD. Shortly afterward, SLOPD arrived and issued a noise citation with a notation that there
were 200 people. (See video, attached” “10.28.2023 496 Kentucky at Stafford 9.40 pm SLOPD UTL”)
Obvious fraternity parties are often cleared by SLOPD as a NV, UTL or No Report.
History of Noise Complaints to SLOPD at Illegal Fraternity Houses in R-1/R-2 Residential Neighborhoods
7
A couple years ago, SLOPD leadership acknowledged in an email that they are aware of the satellite fraternity
houses throughout our neighborhood, but stated SLOPD does not treat them as the same as they do legal
fraternities with use permits. Several satellite fraternity houses in R-1/R-2 residential neighborhoods are the
main chapter houses for their fraternities. One example is Phi Sigma Kappa. They have two fraternity houses: a
satellite house at 1901 Loomis (R-1) and their main chapter house at 348/350 Hathway (R-2) which is the
notorious “pink house” where St. Fratty’s Day was founded in 2009. A few years ago, the house was painted red
and is now called “the barn”.
During the past 1 ½ years, October 2022 – May 2024, SLOPD has been called 30 times for noisy parties at
348/350 Hathway Avenue and have issued 16 noise citations including a Report Filed for a citation. There are no
noise complaints during summer, from mid-June to mid-September. If you include the previous year from 2021,
there are 47 calls to SLOPD for noisy parties and 25 noise citations, including an additional “Report Filed” (RF)
but I have only included calls the past 1 1/2 years below:
Some parties listed were cleared as a negative violation (NV) but were actually violations of the noise ordinance.
Kathie sent videos of parties that were cleared as NV to SLOPD and a SLOPD watch commander acknowledged in
an email that the parties were "a clear violation" of the noise ordinance. He said the oversight by not citing the
parties was handled internally with the officers. There were also at least two calls for noisy parties that do not
show up on the SLOPD log, so they are not documented except by videos of the parties and phone logs showing
the calls were made to SLOPD.
Somehow, city management has overlooked the illegal fraternities and the problems they have caused as they
have crept further into residential neighborhoods. The CDD oversees the use permits for fraternities and
8
sororities but has not proactively enforced the zoning regulations for the illegal fraternity houses in R-1 and R-2
neighborhoods, or those without use permits in R-3 and R-4 neighborhoods.
280 California: Alpha Epsilon Pi Complaint
The Community Development Department has also ignored a complaint we made against Alpha Epsilon Pi at 280
California Blvd on 2/5/2024 for repeated violations of their use permit including large, disruptive late-night
parties that could be heard from a block away. The fraternity house backs up to Hathway Avenue at the end of
Fredericks Street. We spoke with the city manager, Derek Johnson, about the issue and he suggested we file a
complaint, which we did. Alpha Epsilon Pi also operates an illegal fraternity at 331 Hathway, which is next to the
main chapter house and is zoned R-2.
Over the course of 10 months, Alpha Epsilon Pi at 280 California Blvd was issued 6 noise citations, including 2
unruly gatherings, which was the basis for the complaint. There were also other noise complaints for loud parties
that were not cited by SLOPD. I have attached the complaint, for your reference.
Condition 1 of the use permit limits occupancy of the house to 19 people, including the resident manager.
Condition 12 of the use permit states, “No meetings, parties, or other types of activities involving persons other
than residents living on site shall be allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m.”
The noise citations listed in the complaint were issued after 10 p.m. with 250 people at one party and 150 at
another party.
Condition 5 of the use permit states, “The use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at any time,
if any reasonable written citizen… complaint is received by the city. In review of the use permit, the Planning
Commission may add, delete, or modify conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit.”
It’s been nearly four months since our complaint was filed and the CDD has not taken any action to have our
complaint reviewed by the Planning Commission, as outlined in the terms of the fraternity’s use permit. Kathie
has emailed CDD multiple times about the matter without any resolution.
Since our complaint was filed, Alpha Epsilon Pi at 280 California has had additional noise complaints and has
been issued three more noise citations.
The number of people was not noted on the 2/10/2024 citation, but on 5/10/2024 there were 50 people and
100 people on 5/17/2024. Each of the parties was after 10 p.m.
9
If the conditions of a use permit are not followed, especially when a complaint is filed according to the terms
outlined in the use permit, then the use permit serves no meaningful purpose. I urge you to direct the CDD to
enforce the conditions of the use permits issued to fraternities in the city. There needs to be accountability for
the operations of fraternities because people who live nearby are gravely affected.
Finally, below is a map that was prepared in October 2023 for Kathie’s report to the city that shows Cal Poly’s
fraternities, including those operating illegally in lower-density neighborhoods. The map is missing a couple of
fraternities discovered since it was made but gives you a general idea of the volume and location of the fraternity
operations. Presently, there are only seven use permits for six different fraternities in San Luis Obispo.
Thank you for your time. It’s a complicated issue. I especially appreciate your consideration when granting future
Use Permits to fraternities. It’s important to realize that a fraternity house has a very large impact on their
neighbors and protections must be in place for those nearby to enable them the quiet enjoyment of their
property which is afforded to all Californians 1. It’s also essential that complaints against the Use Permits be taken
seriously.
Very truly yours,
Steve Walker
1 Calif Heath & Safety Code §46000 (f) All Californians are entitled to a peaceful and quiet environment without the
intrusion of noise which may be hazardous to their health or welfare.