Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail Batch 1C - Produced107 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:34 AM To:kathie walker Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) Hi Kathie, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for the upcoming meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: kathie walker < Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 11:04 AM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear City Councilmembers, In June 2024, City Planner Hannah Hanh told me that the conditions of the CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha were based on the two most recent CUPs, which are for two sororities. Each has limited occupancy of 6 and 7 residents, respectively. Fraternity use is much different than sorority use because sororities don’t have parties with alcohol. Sororities go to fraternity houses to party, and fraternities have large parties with alcohol that are extremely disruptive to their neighbors. Even if the City considers sororities and fraternities as the same use, conditions must be added to the proposed CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha to mitigate the known, documented problems associated with noise and fraternity use. The municipal code states that violating the City’s noise ordinance is a public nuisance, is detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of others, and is contrary to public interest. On the other hand, the Staff Report claims that there are “exceptions” to the City’s noise ordinance that enable the Community Development Director to approve Special Event Permits, and such events are allowed to violate the City’s noise ordinance. 108 I can understand issuing a Special Event Permit to allow greater occupancy during certain hours of operation, such as during the day for an event, however allowing a permit to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood, especially at night, is not reasonable. The municipal code cited by Staff (SLOMC 9.12.100) says that any “exceptions” that allow violation of the noise ordinance can only be granted if all the following three conditions are met: 1. It is subject to limitations “appropriate to protect the public health, safety and welfare from the noise emanating therefrom”, 2. If the [fraternity] applicant can demonstrate that bringing the source of sound or activity into compliance with the noise ordinance “would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the [fraternity] applicant, on the community, or on other persons”, and 3. Must balance the denial [not being allowed to have an event that violates the noise ordinance] as a hardship on the applicant against (1) the adverse impact on the health, safety, and welfare of other persons affected; (2) the adverse impact on property affected; and (3) any other adverse impacts of granting the exception [to allow a fraternity party to violate the noise ordinance]. I’m unsure what limitations cited in item 1. could prevent the neighbors from hearing an outdoor fraternity party with 100 people and/or amplified noise, especially at night when people are trying to sleep, and when the noise ordinance prohibits amplified noise from crossing the property line. Is it truly a “hardship” if the fraternity is not allowed to host an amplified event in a residential neighborhood that violates the noise ordinance? The fraternity representative said they will have at least 4 events over the next 9 months that will requi re Special Event Permits. The fraternity should host those events at a third-party venue so the people living nearby are able to sleep and be rested for work, school, or other life obligations. There are 19 fraternities at Cal Poly. How many events that violate the noise ordinance (considered by the SLOMC to be a public nuisance, detrimental to health, welfare, and safety, and contrary to public interest ) should the City’s neighborhoods endure? Another factor that isn’t mentioned is that sororities and other guests walk through the neighborhoods to attend these events. They yell, especially after they’ve been drinking, coming and going from the events and this goes on for hours. Fraternity parties impact the neighborhood beyond the fraternity house, itself. The “hardship” of living near a fraternity is borne by the neighbors who are kept awake by loud fraternity parties. There is no way to balance or mitigate the adverse impact for those living and working nearby. It is not reasonable to allow events within a residential neighborhood that violate the noise ordinance which, according to the City’s municipal code, is detrimental to people’s health, safety, and welfare and is a public nuisance. Our family is impacted by fraternities on Foothill Blvd. We can hear them from our house. At times we thought the noise was coming from a block over on Bond St or Hathway Ave because it was so loud, but upon locating the source of the noise, we found the party was at a fraternity on Foothill. A video link to one recent event at a fraternity on Foothill that could be heard from our house is included in my previous correspondence to the Planning Commission. I have attached my correspondence to this email. It took three responses from SLOPD to shut down the fraternity party on Foothill Blvd and officers had to call their sergeant to the scene because the fraternity refused to stop the disruptive party! I’ve wondered if there were any consequences to that fraternity, other than the noise citations. Our family needs to sleep due to work and other family obligations. If my husband can’t sleep, he cannot go to work because he has a safety-related job, and if he can’t work it affects our family’s income. Using the balancing factors cited by City staff, outlined in SLOMC 9.12.100, a “hardship” on a fraternity for not being able to host large parties with amplified noise in violation of the noise ordinance, does not outweigh the protection of the neighborhood and allowing people to sleep so they can go to work. I honestly can’t believe I have to say this because it seems like common sense. There are obvious blind spots within the City Administration when it comes to dealing with the “fraternity situation” overall, understanding/enforcing the noise they generate, and enforcing the existing CUPs for permitted fraternity houses that flout the law, even when a written complaint is made. There are also 70+ documented illegal fraternity houses operating as full-fledged fraternity houses throughout the City’s neighborhoods, many operating as the main chapter houses for their fraternities, and they are still going strong a year after I gave a detailed report to Community Development with documentation of the fraternity locations, including fraternities' social media posts. Cal Poly’s AB 524 report also documented the address locations of fraternity events, which confirmed the social media documentation I provided in my report. The standard of proof required to cite these illegal fraternities is a “preponderance of the evidence” which means it is more likely than not. The documentation adequately met that burden, yet the fraternities continue to operate illegally at the addresses that were identified a year ago. 109 Unfortunately, many of those addresses, including the main chapter houses of some fraternities, were not sent Notices of Viol ation or Advisory Letters. Some were, but even then, some Notices of Violation were missing dates, and many of the Advisory Letters were lost by the Community Development Department, so there is no physical record. I was asked to use the AskSLO app to make reports and did so, but most of the reports I made that specifically identified dates, times, and addresses of illegal fraternity events were not followed up on during the dates, times, and addresses provided to the Community Development Department so were dismissed as unfounded, even though the events occurred. The "fraternity situation" has been so disheartening. And now I am even more baffled after reading the City Staff's arguments AGAINST addition conditions to the fraternity's CUP which promotes wellness in the neighborhood. Is it because Community Development staff are already so overburdened that they don't want to take responsibility for enforcing the CUP? I can't think of any other logical explanation to justify not having a threshold of violations that trigger a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission. Under the “exceptions” cited by City Staff that would allow the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance (9.12.100. A.2.), the municipal code also says, “Any individual who claims to be adversely affected by an allowance of the exception may file a statement with the noise control officer containing any information to support his or her claim. If at any time the noise control officer finds that a sufficient controversy exists regarding an application, a public hearing will be held.” How does “any individual” know that the fraternity has applied for an “exception” to host an event in violation of the noise ordinance? Are neighbors notified before the noise control officer grants the exception so they "have an opportunity file a statement with the noise control officer"? The Staff report says a Special Event Permit can only be approved with the three required findings listed in SLOMC 17.108.040. Finding 2 says the event “is consistent with or an improvement to the character of the neighborhood or zone.” A fraternity party does not improve the character of the neighborhood. Also, a fraternity is not allowed “by right” in an R-4 neighborhood. The CUP is meant to include conditions that mitigate the impact of fraternity use so that the fraternity house fits into the residential neighborhood, as a residence that is permitted to hold gatherings of up to a certain amount of people during certain hours. People of all demographics live in our neighborhood. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario that would be considered an improvement to the character of the neighborhood by allowing a fraternity event to violate the noise ordinance. Please limit Special Event Permits to allow an increase in occupancy limitations for events, and do not allow events to violate the City's noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. Appeal Issue No. 3 – Limitation reverts to “residential occupancy” limit per condition 4 at night from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. The appeal also asks for a limitation on occupancy from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. based on the maximum allowed residential occupancy limitation listed in condition 4, which says “The fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 24 residents for the property.” The Staff Response says that the condition cannot limit the type of people (residents vs. non-residents) but acknowledges that it is permissible to limit the number of people for the use. While the wording of the condition cannot list the limitation to residents, it is legal to limit the occupancy to 24 after 10 p.m. Condition 5 limits the number of people for “routine meetings and gatherings” to 48. The reason the limitation of persons on site after 10 p.m. is included in other fraternity CUPs and is requested here is that the noise generated by 48 people is much greater than the noise generated by 24 people. This is a residence in a residential neighborhood. The fraternity representative told the Planning Commission that gatherings happen outdoors, between the front and back houses. Noise generated by 48 people would violate the noise ordinance and disturb the neighbors. The primary concern about the fraternity’s use is noise. I know the noise ordinance isn’t that interesting but here are some main points: -The noise ordinance is a 24/7 regulation and prohibits a "noise disturbance" that is plainly audible 50 feet from the noisemaker. The dictionary defines a "noise disturbance" as the interruption of a settled and peaceful condition. -Amplified sound (television, radio, etc.) is prohibited from crossing the property line after 10 p.m. - Depending on the "character of sound", for example, if the noise contains music or speech, it cannot exceed 45 decibels across the property line after 10 p.m. for 30 minutes, which is equivalent to the sound level in a library. Noise that includes music or speech at 65 decibels is prohibited from crossing the property line, which is equivalent to the sound level of a normal conversation. These are the standards outlined in the City’s noise ordinance. There are free apps you can download on your phone that measure decibel levels and it’s surprising how “loud” everyday things are, such as a conversation, which can be disturbing at night when ambient noise levels are low and people nearby are trying to sleep. 110 Limiting the number of people after 10 p.m. is consistent with the required findings per SLOMC 17.86.130, which is also cited in the Findings of the Draft Resolution and states “the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities … and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties.” Nighttime, after 10 p.m., is a sensitive time when most people are trying to sleep, and it is a reasonable condition to limit the number of people on the property to 24 from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Please add this condition to the fraternity’s CUP. Land Use and Housing Elements in the General Plan The Findings in the Draft Resolution state that the project is consistent with the General Plan because “the project would facilitate Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 and Housing Element Policy 8.6 (sic) by locating a fraternity in proximity to the Cal Poly SLO campus.” For context, the first sentence of Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 states, “The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate fraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board.” The secondary portion of the policy says, “If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to medium-high and high-density residential areas near campus.” Please consider the intended meaning of this policy. Allowing more and more fraternities to overtake the residential neighborhoods does not further this policy. The first sentence of Housing Element Policy 8.5 says, “Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. And secondarily, “Until that is possible, they should be located in medium-high to high-density residential zones near campus.” (Policy 8.6, referenced in the Draft Resolution, refers to Cal Poly staff housing and is not applicable here.) Again, the primary sentence in this policy is for fraternities to be located on campus, not in the City's neighborhoods. Allowing more fraternities in the City does not "facilitate" the intended meaning of these policies in the General Plan, as claimed in the Draft Resolution. Housing Element Program 8.15 says, “Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus fraternity/sorority living groups.” That portion of the General Plan was not included in the Draft Resolution. These Programs and Policies were adopted ten years ago, in 2014. What has the City done to further their implementation? The City’s General Plan recognizes that fraternities and sororities do not belong in the City and should be located on Cal Poly’s campus. The Planning Commissioners also said that fraternities should be on Cal Poly’s campus. Since Cal Poly does not have a Greek Row, the burden of housing the fraternities falls on the City and its neighborhoods. To mitigate the negative impacts of a fraternity in a residential neighborhood, a CUP must have conditions that specifically address relevant issues, and those conditions should be listed in the CUP so they are clear to the fraternity. Specific conditions that address common issues for a fraternity’s use should be included in the CUP to establish clear communication of the expectations and the consequences for the fraternity if they don’t adhere to the listed conditions. For instance, the following condition is included in other fraternity CUPs, which was requested in the appeal, and makes sense: “Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit.” The City Staff implies that the fraternity already has to follow this condition of use because it must follow Federal, State, and local laws and the obligation is listed throughout Chapter 17 of the SLOMC, so it doesn't need to be included as a condition. If it’s not listed as a condition in the CUP, how does the fraternity know that it’s a condition of use? Also, any written complaints, especially by community members, are based on the conditions outlined in the CUP. It's confusing if the condition is not specifically listed as a condition in the CUP. This condition and others suggested in the appeal, should be included in the CUP so the conditions are clear to the fraternity and the community. Finally, you might think that Lambda Chi Alpha would be on their best behavior in anticipation of this appeal. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month, so it seems simple: Don’t have loud parties that violate the noise ordinance and don’t have more t han the maximum occupancy of 48 as outlined in the CUP before the City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. But in the past few weeks, the fraternity has had multiple calls to SLOPD for noise. (None were made by me or my family.) During the first week of classes a call was made to SLOPD and the dispatcher noted in the log that the fraternity was partying in the front yard at 1264 Foothill with a sign that said, “YOU HONK, WE DRINK”. 111 After that, there were at least two more loud parties at night and were issued noise citations at 1264 Foothill on 10/2/2024 and 10/9/2024. One citation lists 70 people at the party. During the Planning Commission hearing, the Chair asked the fraternity representative, Thomas Symer, if Lambda Chi Alpha had any satellite houses that held fraternity events in the neighborhood. Mr. Symer said they did not. However, that isn’t true. Lambda Chi Alpha has at least five illegal fraternity houses in the Alta Vista neighborhood that held documented fraternity events during the last academic year, including at 171 Orange, 12 Hathway, 253 Albert, and 278 Albert. Mr. Symer’s name was listed as the person cited at a fraternity event at one of those addresses. Lambda Chi Alpha has continued to hold illegal fraternity events at those addresses during rush recruitment this academic year, for the past two weekends. The fraternity is not even pretending to care about the neighborhood even though they know their use permit is subject to a City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. This emphasizes the need for clear conditions in the CUP that outline the conditions/rules for and the consequences of the fraternity use. Conditions are necessary and also beneficial for the community and the fraternity because they clarify the expectations and mitigate the impact of use. As mentioned, a fraternity's use is not “by-right” in an R-4 zone. The reason a CUP is required - to set forth conditions to resolve the negative impacts - is so the fraternity house(s) fits into the R-4 zone as a residential use. I am baffled at the City’s resistance to strengthening the CUP for this large, impactful fraternity use. This CUP will be a model for other fraternity CUPs. It is critical that it contains meaningful conditions that make the fraternity’s obligations clear and mitigate its impact on the neighborhood. I urge you to uphold the appeal to add conditions to the fraternity CUP for the good of the neighborhood and the fraternity, so everyone knows what is expected because it’s listed as a condition in the CUP. Thank you, Kathie Walker 112 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:35 AM To:Steven Walker Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: 6.b. Appeal for a Fraternity CUP at 1264 Foothill Hi Steven, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for the upcoming meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Steven Walker < Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2024 2:56 PM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: 6.b. Appeal for a Fraternity CUP at 1264 Foothill This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Mayor Stewart and Councilmembers, I must respond to the City staff’s report, beginning with Appeal Issue Number 4. City staff says that setting a threshold of violations within a certain timeframe that triggers a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission somehow prohibits staff from referring the CUP to the Planning Condition for re-review upon receipt of any substantiated violation or frequency of violations. 113 I’ve read the appeal, and nothing is suggested to prevent staff from referring the CUP to the Planning Commission at any time if a provision is added for a threshold of violations that trigger a review. It could be two violations in six months or four violations in twelve months. These are not permissive or excusable but require some form of action when the threshold of violations is met. It makes the condition more effective. Here are the historical facts: 1. Every fraternity CUP currently has multiple documented violations of its conditions. 2. Despite these multiple violations, city staff, including those listed in Condition 3 (Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Department, or Police Department) have never written a complaint against a CUP for re-review by the Planning Commission. It seems the responsibility for writing a complaint is left to the residents, if you leave the condition as it is, without a trigger for review. 3. Many residents are afraid to file a written complaint because of potential retaliation from fraternity members. This is a realistic fear because several residents have had their property vandalized or faced other repercussions when fraternity members suspected their neighbor called SLOPD to report a noisy party. One neighbor had their car vandalized and others have been cussed out by fraternity members after noise citations were issued to fraternities near their homes. An unofficial fraternity house for Sigma Pi moved in next door to our family and members began cyberstalking my wife 24 hours after they received a noise citation for a noisy party, and I was away at work. Among other things, they posted ads on Craigslist advertising “free” items at our house and made appointments for people to come to our home. For months afterward, they incessantly teased and harassed our dog, yelled “F#ck you!” toward our home randomly, day and night from a side deck adjacent to our bedrooms and kitchen, banged on trash bins filled with empty bottles for several minutes in the middle of the night after moving them close to our bedroom windows, and can be heard admitting it was done to harass us. We have the video. Our property was also vandalized. Nearly a year after the fraternity members moved out, someone related to the fraternity trespassed onto our property, walked up to our bedroom window, called out my wife’s name, then walked away. Afterward, they are seen and heard on our video surveillance saying they “are friends with the Sigma Pi guys who lived here last year.” Our home address was repeatedly posted on social media, for example, advertising a party at 5 a.m. on St. Fratty’s Day at our address. There are too many incidents to list and the harassment has continued, even though the fraternity members moved out in June 2023. The repercussions experienced by our family and our neighbors were based on suspicions by fraternity members because of the fraternity's proximity to their neighbors. There was no way for the fraternity members to know positively that we, or our neighbors, called SLOPD but their suspicions drove them to take these actions. For these reasons, it is not reasonable to rely on a written complaint by a resident against a fraternity’s CUP. 4. I wrote a complaint for repeated violations of a fraternity’s CUP, and no action was taken. A fraternity with a CUP is located a block from my home, at the end of my street. There are constant noisy parties with hundreds of guests at the fraternity. My wife and I have spoken to the fraternity members several times during noisy parties. In the nine months between 3/18/2023 and 12/3/2023, SLOPD issued six noise citations to the fraternity, including two unruly gatherings 114 with hundreds of people. On 2/5/2024, I submitted a written complaint to Community Development Director, Timmi Tway. It has been over eight months, and the written complaint has not been forwarded to the Planning Commission. (!!!) Community Development did not contact the fraternity about the complaint filed on 2/5/2024 and the fraternity continued to have large, noisy parties. Between 2/10/2024 and 6/8/2024, SLOPD issued five more noise citations to the fraternity, some with 100 people. We filed another written complaint on 6/3/2024 citing four additional citations since the previous written complaint made on 2/5/2024. Neither written complaint has been forwarded to the Planning Commission. Within that time frame, several Planning Commission meetings were canceled because there was nothing on their agenda. Community Development should have taken care of the matter soon after the first written complaint was filed on 2/5/2024. We contacted Community Development multiple times because of the ongoing, noisy parties at the fraternity after we filed our written complaint. The city’s code enforcement supervisor, John Mezzapesa, said that the written complaint was given to Tyler Corey to handle, and he was working on it, but Mr. Corey didn’t do anything. It’s been over 8 months, and the Planning Commission has still not received my complaint(s). Let's be honest. It is not realistic to believe that Community Development will be proactive in filing a complaint and refer a fraternity to the Planning Commission for re-review, especially after one violation, as they suggest in their response. An existing CUP for a fraternity says that any written complaint will be forwarded to the Planning Commission within one week of receipt. In addition to adding a threshold for violations, I feel it is important to have a deadline in Condition 3 for forwarding a complaint to the Planning Commission after it is received. During the Planning Commission hearing on 6/12/2024, Commissioner Kahn suggested a threshold of four violations within 12 months as a trigger for review. As the city staff was drafting new conditions, Commissioner Kahn again emphasized adding that condition, and staff told him that it was already covered by Condition 3. However, there is a distinct difference between requiring a written complaint and having a threshold of violations to trigger a review of the CUP. Setting a threshold of violations of the CUP within a specified timeframe guarantees there will be a review at some point if the fraternity reaches that threshold. It does not require a written complaint from a resident, though a resident may still write a complaint. But as I’ve described, many affected residents do not feel comfortable doing so. It does not rely on Code Enforcement, Fire, or SLOPD to file a complaint, though they may still do so. But City Staff has not asked for a review of any fraternity’s CUP even though every fraternity CUP has had multiple ongoing violations for several years. It does not prevent staff from asking for a review sooner, after one violation, if they choose to do so. But realistically they will not do so considering fraternities have many ongoing violations of their CUPs and no review has ever been requested by city staff. A condition with a threshold of violations that trigger a review by the Planning Commission should be added to the CUP. It protects the health, safety, and well-being of the neighborhood and holds the fraternity responsible for the conditions of their CUP. Adding Conditions to the CUP to Make Things More Clear to the Fraternity: In response to Appeal Issue No. 1, where the appeal asks for specific conditions related to realistic problems of a fraternity use in a residential neighborhood that are listed in other fraternity CUPs, staff says that adding conditions to the CUP is not necessary because the SLOMC has had “incremental improvements” between 1983 and 2013 that directly address concerns related to noise, etc. The “improvements” include updating unrelated things like adding days to the safety enhancement zone or updating fine amounts for citations. It seems disingenuous to imply that these changes justify omitting useful conditions that are 115 included in other fraternity CUPs. Those conditions strengthen the CUP and help to clarify the conditions to the fraternity. When the other CUPs were drafted, the city also had a noise ordinance, residential occupancy requirements, etc. but the Planning Commission included certain conditions to emphasize the fraternity’s obligation to follow the noise ordinance and other laws. These added conditions outline the fraternity’s responsibility to the neighborhood and the consequences for violation of the CUP. Spelling out these specific conditions is beneficial because they clarify common issues related to a fraternity’s use, especially related to its location in a residential neighborhood. When the conditions are documented in a CUP it is less likely that there will be confusion by the fraternity about relevant laws and conditions. I brought up this issue during public comment at the Planning Commission hearing and the commissioners agreed that specifically mentioning the noise ordinance and “quiet hours” is important, even though it’s already in the city’s noise ordinance. It would also be helpful if the Community Development Department met with each fraternity at the beginning of the academic year to review the conditions in the CUPs so there is a clear understanding of the specific conditions. Special Event Permits and Violation of the City’s Noise Ordinance : In response to Appeal Issue No. 2, staff says the municipal code allows the noise control officer to grant exceptions for the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance if deemed appropriate. I don’t understand how it can ever be deemed appropriate for a fraternity to violate the noise ordinance. This is a residential neighborhood. The noise ordinance ensures that every residential neighborhood is protected from unhealthy levels of noise and allows people to rest when needed. It doesn’t make sense that there is a carve-out for a fraternity to violate the law with what the staff’s report refers to as “amplified noise-generating activity”. It is harmful to even suggest a condition that grants an exception of the law to fraternities so they can have a party or multiple parties each year in a residential neighborhood. My work schedule includes long shifts, ranging from 12.5 to 14 hours, and switches between days and nights. I also work on weekends. I depend on a quiet environment at home to sleep between my shifts. As an EMS pilot, it would be unsafe for me to work if I am not rested. It’s unbelievable to imagine that the city would allow noisy parties that would potentially disturb its neighbors and interrupt our ability to sleep. The fraternity brings in a lot of money from its members and can afford to hold larger, amplified, noisy events at a third-party venue. Cal Poly should explore the possibility of providing a venue for their Greek life organizations to hold events on campus. I’ve attended several events on campus at various facilities and they were well done, with catering and other amenities. Cal Poly needs to start taking more responsibility for its fraternities. Cal Poly has recently recruited four more fraternity chapters to its campus without housing provisions for the location of their fraternity houses. Each of those new fraternity chapters is illegally located in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods and hosts fraternity events. Still, Cal Poly continues to recruit even more fraternity chapters to its campus and the impact of fraternity activities on our neighborhoods continues to increase. There are now 19 fraternities in the IFC and only 6 have CUPs. 116 This CUP is setting a precedent for other fraternity CUPs and there should NOT be a condition that allows fraternity parties to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood under any circumstances. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month and Lambda Chi Alpha at 1264 Foothill has already had several noise complaints and two noise citations in the past two weeks for noisy parties after 10 p.m. One of the noise citations says there were 70 people at the fraternity party. The CUP for 1264 Foothill says that occupancy is limited to 48 people unless they have a special event permit. The fraternity doesn't seem to care about the conditions in its CUP or their impact on the neighborhood. A month ago, the police log described a party in the front yard with a sign that said, "You honk, We drink". That party wasn't cited. Considering the documented issues related to fraternities in general, for the protection of the neighborhood and surrounding neighbors, and considering the fraternities’ lack of understanding of the current conditions of their CUPs and laws, I respectfully request that you uphold the appeal and add conditions to the fraternity’s CUP to make it more effective and clear for the fraternity. It also sets a precedent for future CUPs so it’s important to get it right. Thank you. Sincerely, Steve Walker 117 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:35 AM To:Jeff Eidelman Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Tuesday night’s meeting Hi Jeff, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for the upcoming meeting. Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Eidelman < Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 1:38 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Tuesday night’s meeting This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. ________________________________ Although I am currently not home, I want to make a few comments on the noise issues with the frat houses on the 1200 block of Foothill. Over the last year I have contacted the Police about a dozen times for an all afternoon, loud raucous parties coming each week from this area. I live off of Kentucky and Hathway and the decibel level far exceeds 85 db according to the app on my phone. Once the police went out three times in one day and the students attempted to intimidate the police, due to their numbers. What city staff says is an exception to the rules is truly BS, pardon my French. The citizens of San Luis Obispo should not have to put up with this kind of noise level and it is certainly not impinging on any students ‘rights’ to attend Cal Poly. I beg you to repudiate this ridiculous request to allow these fraternities to blow us all away. How many times, in how many years do we have to keep asking for reasonable rules and regulations to have normalcy in our neighborhoods? Thank you Jeff Eidelman San Luis Obispo Sent from my iPhone, where typo's are now the rule, not the exception! 118 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:34 AM To:Sandra Rowley Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: SUBJECT: Item 6b, Review of an Appeal Regarding a Fraternity Conditional Use Permit Hi Sandra, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for the upcoming meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2024 11:41 AM To: Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Cc: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: SUBJECT: Item 6b, Review of an Appeal Regarding a Fraternity Conditional Use Permit This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, First of all, RQN appreciates that Lamda Chi Alpha applied for this Conditional Use Permit - an action many other fraternities have not taken. Please keep in mind during your review and deliberation that Lamda Chi Alpha is first of all a residence that is located in a neighborhood. The area in which it is located contains seniors, families, and children as well as college students. It is not adjacent to or part of the downtown which comes alive from before 8 a.m. until after 2 a.m., nor is it in an identified entertainment zone. The staff report implies that the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is different from previous fraternity CUP’s because they were issued several years ago. However, we contend that it is different because it was based on more recent CUP’s that were issued to two sororities, Delta Gamma and Alpha Omicron Pi. 119 Sororities vs Fraternities Why should fraternity CUP’s be different from sorority CUP’s? The National Panhellenic Conference requires sororities to hold alcohol-free events and prohibits Panhellenic funds from being used to buy alcohol. Fraternities do not have this restriction. As a result, sororities hold many events at fraternities or at third-party venues; thus, events held at sorority houses are not as disruptive as those held at fraternity houses and do not need the added conditions. For example, during the 2023-2024 academic year six (6) fraternities had 37 noise complaints while nine (9) sororities had 2 noise complaints. By the way, there is no reason that fraternities cannot also host parties and other large gatherings at third-party venues; fraternities at other CSU’s do this. The changes made to Noise Control (updating fine amounts), Unruly Gatherings (clarifying components) and the Safety Enhancement Zones (adding holidays) do not compensate for the conditions placed in other fraternity CUP’s that were omitted from this one. Those conditions should be restored. Additionally, five of six CUP’s currently in effect, including the previous one for Lamda Chi Alpha, restrict the number of persons allowed on the site between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. The new Resolution, No. PC-1085-24, allows a maximum 48 people at routine meetings and gatherings. However, no time of day is specified, thus allowing 48 people to be on-site between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. Forty-eight people gathering outside during nocturnal hours can, and often do, make a considerable amount of noise, and this is a residential neighborhood. The Current Condition 14 states: The fraternity use shall comply with Table 1 (Exterior Noise Limits) of Section 9. 12. 060 (Exterior Noise Limits) between the extended hours of 10: 00 pm and 9:00 am, except as approved in writing as a special event by the Community Development Director. This allows 48 people on-site during the extended hours without a special event permit. In this part of town, especially at this time of night, adherence to the noise ordinance is critical. MC 17.86.130 B.1., Required Findings, Fraternities and Sororities, states: “As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities, provide adequate parking, and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties. The project will be compatible with site constraints and the character of the neighborhood.” (emphasis added) 1. Replace Condition 14 to read: “No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than the 24 fraternity members living on the site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m., except as approved in writing as a special event by the Community Development Director.” Current Condition 16 states: Live entertainment, bands, and/or amplified sounds are prohibited, unless otherwise approved through a special event by the Community Development Department. However, MC 9.12.040 General noise regulations states: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, and in addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully or negligently make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, or permit or allow to be made or continued any noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes any discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity in the area. No permit shall be issued for any activity that may violate this section.” (emphasis added) Amplified music from bands or DJ's can be disturbing not only to neighbors nearby, but also to those living several streets away from the site where it is occurring, and it definitely disturbs the peace and quiet of a neighborhood. 2. Replace Condition 16 to read: “No events involving the use of amplified sound equipment shall be allowed.” Authority and Duties of the Noise Control Office(r) (NCO): MC 9.12.30 states: “The noise control program established by this chapter shall be administered by the community development department (administration/special exceptions of time periods greater than forty-eight hours/ zoning enforcement) and the police department (noise violation enforcement/special exceptions of time periods less than forty-eight hours).” (emphasis added) It is unclear to whom one would go for the Special Event Permit. Initially to the Community Development 120 Director who then provides it to the Police Chief for action or to the Police Chief who then coordinates with the Community Development Director? Limitation on Gatherings: We are confused about the discussion in the staff report since MC 17.86.130 specifies a Required Finding that conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities, provide adequate parking and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties. In addition, other fraternity CUP’s contain the same or similarly worded restrictions. (emphasis added) Threshold: Reference Condition 3 to provide a threshold to automatically trigger Planning Commission review. Why is an automatic threshold needed? Two written complaints have been sent to the Community Development Department concerning the same fraternity, one in February 2024 (6 noise violations/unruly gatherings in 10 months) and one in June 2024 (included an additional 5 complaints, some with 100 people). Thus far no Planning Commission meeting has included review of the fraternity’s CUP. The Planning Commission suggested a “four strikes” threshold within 12 months, whereby the CUP would automatically be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the fraternity received four violations of the City’s noise ordinance or property maintenance regulations within 12 months. > The previous CUP for 1264 E. Foothill included an equivalent provision in Condition 10: “Use permit shall be reviewed if the City receives any reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints, or if two convictions are received for violations of the City's noise or property maintenance regulations within a six-month period. It also stated: In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the use permit. The Planning Commission may consider adding a condition requiring fraternity officers to perform a community service project in the neighborhood.” > The new CUP revised that condition, now Condition 3, to state: “The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the City receives substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Department or Police Department employee, which contains information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a violation of this Conditional Use Permit, or of City Ordinances, regulations, or Police Department resources ( e. g., calls for service) applicable to the fraternity use has occurred. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, the conditions of approval may be added, modified, and/or removed, or the Conditional Use Permit may be revoked.” This new CUP places the burden of writing up a complaint on City staff as well as on residents. Code Enforcement (the Community Development Department) knows, and has documentation, of violations of property maintenance standards and the outcome, and the Police Log shows when there has been a DAC or citation issued to a fraternity and the Police Department knows if it was or was not successfully appealed. These “proofs” can be used in lieu of written complaints and, hopefully, be referred to the Planning Commission in a timely fashion if a threshold of violations is established to trigger review. Written complaints could still be accepted, just not be the only form of input required. Recommend revising Condition 3 to read: 3. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if and when the fraternity receives four violations of the City’s noise ordinance, or four property maintenance violations, or a combination of the two equaling four violations within 12 months. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission may consider adding a condition requiring fraternity officers to perform one or more community service projects in the neighborhood. Accumulation of Violations against the Parcel The Planning Commission suggested that violations should accumulate against the parcel instead of against each of the six individual addresses since it is one parcel, one CUP and the property is occupied exclusively by the fraternity. This was also suggested in written and oral comments. However, this condition was not included. The Staff Report is correct that the Conditional Use Permit regulates activities for the entire parcel – as it relates to property maintenance violations. This is not just because of the CUP, but also because the Community Development Department also deals with a property using their APN. However, the Police Department addresses noise violations by street name and number. For example, this 121 property, which was subject to a CUP from 2001-2021, received noise citations at 1264 and 1264 ½ Foothill separately; therefore, the citation fines were not cumulative against the property. With six addresses and two streets as part of this parcel it is conceivable that separate addresses could all be issued “first citations” for noise ($350) instead of subsequent ones that carry a higher penalty without them ever being attributed to the parcel as a whole. That was the rationale for requesting a condition be added to attribute noise violations for any of these addresses to the main house at 1264 East Foothill. We believe a condition so stating is consistent with holding the fraternity collectively responsible for their activities. Recommend a new condition: 4. All dwellings on the property, regardless of street address, shall be considered as Lamda Chi Alpha. Any violation of the Municipal Code (or, if preferred, Any violation of the noise ordinance), regardless of the dwelling unit where it occurred, shall be considered a violation by the fraternity and assigned to the main house at 1264 East Foothill and/or this CUP. Compliance with Conditions and with Federal, State, and Local Law This “catch-all” condition is included in most of the existing CUP’s, including the previous one for Lamda Chi Alpha; it reinforces the conditions, the law, and the potential affect of the fraternity’s actions on people in the surrounding area. Recommend new condition: 5. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance, or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit. Last thoughts Land Use Element Policy 2.1, Neighborhood Focus: “The City shall preserve, protect and enhance the City’s neighborhoods and strive to preserve and enhance their identity and promote a higher quality of life within each neighborhood.” Since the CUP goes with the land we wanted to look to the future as well as the present. As the most recent fraternity CUP, we think this could be used as a template for future fraternity CUP’s. Today it’s about the quality of life for everyone living or working in the Alta Vista Neighborhood. Tomorrow it may also include Neighborhoods North of Foothill or other city neighborhoods. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Rowley 122 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:34 AM To:kathie walker Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) Hi Kathie, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for the upcoming meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: kathie walker < Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 11:04 AM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear City Councilmembers, In June 2024, City Planner Hannah Hanh told me that the conditions of the CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha were based on the two most recent CUPs, which are for two sororities. Each has limited occupancy of 6 and 7 residents, respectively. Fraternity use is much different than sorority use because sororities don’t have parties with alcohol. Sororities go to fraternity houses to party, and fraternities have large parties with alcohol that are extremely disruptive to their neighbors. Even if the City considers sororities and fraternities as the same use, conditions must be added to the proposed CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha to mitigate the known, documented problems associated with noise and fraternity use. The municipal code states that violating the City’s noise ordinance is a public nuisance, is detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of others, and is contrary to public interest. On the other hand, the Staff Report claims that there are “exceptions” to the City’s noise ordinance that enable the Community Development Director to approve Special Event Permits, and such events are allowed to violate the City’s noise ordinance. 123 I can understand issuing a Special Event Permit to allow greater occupancy during certain hours of operation, such as during the day for an event, however allowing a permit to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood, especially at night, is not reasonable. The municipal code cited by Staff (SLOMC 9.12.100) says that any “exceptions” that allow violation of the noise ordinance can only be granted if all the following three conditions are met: 1. It is subject to limitations “appropriate to protect the public health, safety and welfare from the noise emanating therefrom”, 2. If the [fraternity] applicant can demonstrate that bringing the source of sound or activity into compliance with the noise ordinance “would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the [fraternity] applicant, on the community, or on other persons”, and 3. Must balance the denial [not being allowed to have an event that violates the noise ordinance] as a hardship on the applicant against (1) the adverse impact on the health, safety, and welfare of other persons affected; (2) the adverse impact on property affected; and (3) any other adverse impacts of granting the exception [to allow a fraternity party to violate the noise ordinance]. I’m unsure what limitations cited in item 1. could prevent the neighbors from hearing an outdoor fraternity party with 100 people and/or amplified noise, especially at night when people are trying to sleep, and when the noise ordinance prohibits amplified noise from crossing the property line. Is it truly a “hardship” if the fraternity is not allowed to host an amplified event in a residential neighborhood that violates the noise ordinance? The fraternity representative said they will have at least 4 events over the next 9 months that will requi re Special Event Permits. The fraternity should host those events at a third-party venue so the people living nearby are able to sleep and be rested for work, school, or other life obligations. There are 19 fraternities at Cal Poly. How many events that violate the noise ordinance (considered by the SLOMC to be a public nuisance, detrimental to health, welfare, and safety, and contrary to public interest ) should the City’s neighborhoods endure? Another factor that isn’t mentioned is that sororities and other guests walk through the neighborhoods to attend these events. They yell, especially after they’ve been drinking, coming and going from the events and this goes on for hours. Fraternity parties impact the neighborhood beyond the fraternity house, itself. The “hardship” of living near a fraternity is borne by the neighbors who are kept awake by loud fraternity parties. There is no way to balance or mitigate the adverse impact for those living and working nearby. It is not reasonable to allow events within a residential neighborhood that violate the noise ordinance which, according to the City’s municipal code, is detrimental to people’s health, safety, and welfare and is a public nuisance. Our family is impacted by fraternities on Foothill Blvd. We can hear them from our house. At times we thought the noise was coming from a block over on Bond St or Hathway Ave because it was so loud, but upon locating the source of the noise, we found the party was at a fraternity on Foothill. A video link to one recent event at a fraternity on Foothill that could be heard from our house is included in my previous correspondence to the Planning Commission. I have attached my correspondence to this email. It took three responses from SLOPD to shut down the fraternity party on Foothill Blvd and officers had to call their sergeant to the scene because the fraternity refused to stop the disruptive party! I’ve wondered if there were any consequences to that fraternity, other than the noise citations. Our family needs to sleep due to work and other family obligations. If my husband can’t sleep, he cannot go to work because he has a safety-related job, and if he can’t work it affects our family’s income. Using the balancing factors cited by City staff, outlined in SLOMC 9.12.100, a “hardship” on a fraternity for not being able to host large parties with amplified noise in violation of the noise ordinance, does not outweigh the protection of the neighborhood and allowing people to sleep so they can go to work. I honestly can’t believe I have to say this because it seems like common sense. There are obvious blind spots within the City Administration when it comes to dealing with the “fraternity situation” overall, understanding/enforcing the noise they generate, and enforcing the existing CUPs for permitted fraternity houses that flout the law, even when a written complaint is made. There are also 70+ documented illegal fraternity houses operating as full-fledged fraternity houses throughout the City’s neighborhoods, many operating as the main chapter houses for their fraternities, and they are still going strong a year after I gave a detailed report to Community Development with documentation of the fraternity locations, including fraternities' social media posts. Cal Poly’s AB 524 report also documented the address locations of fraternity events, which confirmed the social media documentation I provided in my report. The standard of proof required to cite these illegal fraternities is a “preponderance of the evidence” which means it is more likely than not. The documentation adequately met that burden, yet the fraternities continue to operate illegally at the addresses that were identified a year ago. 124 Unfortunately, many of those addresses, including the main chapter houses of some fraternities, were not sent Notices of Viol ation or Advisory Letters. Some were, but even then, some Notices of Violation were missing dates, and many of the Advisory Letters were lost by the Community Development Department, so there is no physical record. I was asked to use the AskSLO app to make reports and did so, but most of the reports I made that specifically identified dates, times, and addresses of illegal fraternity events were not followed up on during the dates, times, and addresses provided to the Community Development Department so were dismissed as unfounded, even though the events occurred. The "fraternity situation" has been so disheartening. And now I am even more baffled after reading the City Staff's arguments AGAINST addition conditions to the fraternity's CUP which promotes wellness in the neighborhood. Is it because Community Development staff are already so overburdened that they don't want to take responsibility for enforcing the CUP? I can't think of any other logical explanation to justify not having a threshold of violations that trigger a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission. Under the “exceptions” cited by City Staff that would allow the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance (9.12.100. A.2.), the municipal code also says, “Any individual who claims to be adversely affected by an allowance of the exception may file a statement with the noise control officer containing any information to support his or her claim. If at any time the noise control officer finds that a sufficient controversy exists regarding an application, a public hearing will be held.” How does “any individual” know that the fraternity has applied for an “exception” to host an event in violation of the noise ordinance? Are neighbors notified before the noise control officer grants the exception so they "have an opportunity file a statement with the noise control officer"? The Staff report says a Special Event Permit can only be approved with the three required findings listed in SLOMC 17.108.040. Finding 2 says the event “is consistent with or an improvement to the character of the neighborhood or zone.” A fraternity party does not improve the character of the neighborhood. Also, a fraternity is not allowed “by right” in an R-4 neighborhood. The CUP is meant to include conditions that mitigate the impact of fraternity use so that the fraternity house fits into the residential neighborhood, as a residence that is permitted to hold gatherings of up to a certain amount of people during certain hours. People of all demographics live in our neighborhood. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario that would be considered an improvement to the character of the neighborhood by allowing a fraternity event to violate the noise ordinance. Please limit Special Event Permits to allow an increase in occupancy limitations for events, and do not allow events to violate the City's noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. Appeal Issue No. 3 – Limitation reverts to “residential occupancy” limit per condition 4 at night from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. The appeal also asks for a limitation on occupancy from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. based on the maximum allowed residential occupancy limitation listed in condition 4, which says “The fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 24 residents for the property.” The Staff Response says that the condition cannot limit the type of people (residents vs. non-residents) but acknowledges that it is permissible to limit the number of people for the use. While the wording of the condition cannot list the limitation to residents, it is legal to limit the occupancy to 24 after 10 p.m. Condition 5 limits the number of people for “routine meetings and gatherings” to 48. The reason the limitation of persons on site after 10 p.m. is included in other fraternity CUPs and is requested here is that the noise generated by 48 people is much greater than the noise generated by 24 people. This is a residence in a residential neighborhood. The fraternity representative told the Planning Commission that gatherings happen outdoors, between the front and back houses. Noise generated by 48 people would violate the noise ordinance and disturb the neighbors. The primary concern about the fraternity’s use is noise. I know the noise ordinance isn’t that interesting but here are some main points: -The noise ordinance is a 24/7 regulation and prohibits a "noise disturbance" that is plainly audible 50 feet from the noisemaker. The dictionary defines a "noise disturbance" as the interruption of a settled and peaceful condition. -Amplified sound (television, radio, etc.) is prohibited from crossing the property line after 10 p.m. - Depending on the "character of sound", for example, if the noise contains music or speech, it cannot exceed 45 decibels across the property line after 10 p.m. for 30 minutes, which is equivalent to the sound level in a library. Noise that includes music or speech at 65 decibels is prohibited from crossing the property line, which is equivalent to the sound level of a normal conversation. These are the standards outlined in the City’s noise ordinance. There are free apps you can download on your phone that measure decibel levels and it’s surprising how “loud” everyday things are, such as a conversation, which can be disturbing at night when ambient noise levels are low and people nearby are trying to sleep. 125 Limiting the number of people after 10 p.m. is consistent with the required findings per SLOMC 17.86.130, which is also cited in the Findings of the Draft Resolution and states “the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities … and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties.” Nighttime, after 10 p.m., is a sensitive time when most people are trying to sleep, and it is a reasonable condition to limit the number of people on the property to 24 from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Please add this condition to the fraternity’s CUP. Land Use and Housing Elements in the General Plan The Findings in the Draft Resolution state that the project is consistent with the General Plan because “the project would facilitate Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 and Housing Element Policy 8.6 (sic) by locating a fraternity in proximity to the Cal Poly SLO campus.” For context, the first sentence of Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 states, “The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate fraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board.” The secondary portion of the policy says, “If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to medium-high and high-density residential areas near campus.” Please consider the intended meaning of this policy. Allowing more and more fraternities to overtake the residential neighborhoods does not further this policy. The first sentence of Housing Element Policy 8.5 says, “Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. And secondarily, “Until that is possible, they should be located in medium-high to high-density residential zones near campus.” (Policy 8.6, referenced in the Draft Resolution, refers to Cal Poly staff housing and is not applicable here.) Again, the primary sentence in this policy is for fraternities to be located on campus, not in the City's neighborhoods. Allowing more fraternities in the City does not "facilitate" the intended meaning of these policies in the General Plan, as claimed in the Draft Resolution. Housing Element Program 8.15 says, “Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus fraternity/sorority living groups.” That portion of the General Plan was not included in the Draft Resolution. These Programs and Policies were adopted ten years ago, in 2014. What has the City done to further their implementation? The City’s General Plan recognizes that fraternities and sororities do not belong in the City and should be located on Cal Poly’s campus. The Planning Commissioners also said that fraternities should be on Cal Poly’s campus. Since Cal Poly does not have a Greek Row, the burden of housing the fraternities falls on the City and its neighborhoods. To mitigate the negative impacts of a fraternity in a residential neighborhood, a CUP must have conditions that specifically address relevant issues, and those conditions should be listed in the CUP so they are clear to the fraternity. Specific conditions that address common issues for a fraternity’s use should be included in the CUP to establish clear communication of the expectations and the consequences for the fraternity if they don’t adhere to the listed conditions. For instance, the following condition is included in other fraternity CUPs, which was requested in the appeal, and makes sense: “Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit.” The City Staff implies that the fraternity already has to follow this condition of use because it must follow Federal, State, and local laws and the obligation is listed throughout Chapter 17 of the SLOMC, so it doesn't need to be included as a condition. If it’s not listed as a condition in the CUP, how does the fraternity know that it’s a condition of use? Also, any written complaints, especially by community members, are based on the conditions outlined in the CUP. It's confusing if the condition is not specifically listed as a condition in the CUP. This condition and others suggested in the appeal, should be included in the CUP so the conditions are clear to the fraternity and the community. Finally, you might think that Lambda Chi Alpha would be on their best behavior in anticipation of this appeal. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month, so it seems simple: Don’t have loud parties that violate the noise ordinance and don’t have more t han the maximum occupancy of 48 as outlined in the CUP before the City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. But in the past few weeks, the fraternity has had multiple calls to SLOPD for noise. (None were made by me or my family.) During the first week of classes a call was made to SLOPD and the dispatcher noted in the log that the fraternity was partying in the front yard at 1264 Foothill with a sign that said, “YOU HONK, WE DRINK”. 126 After that, there were at least two more loud parties at night and were issued noise citations at 1264 Foothill on 10/2/2024 and 10/9/2024. One citation lists 70 people at the party. During the Planning Commission hearing, the Chair asked the fraternity representative, Thomas Symer, if Lambda Chi Alpha had any satellite houses that held fraternity events in the neighborhood. Mr. Symer said they did not. However, that isn’t true. Lambda Chi Alpha has at least five illegal fraternity houses in the Alta Vista neighborhood that held documented fraternity events during the last academic year, including at 171 Orange, 12 Hathway, 253 Albert, and 278 Albert. Mr. Symer’s name was listed as the person cited at a fraternity event at one of those addresses. Lambda Chi Alpha has continued to hold illegal fraternity events at those addresses during rush recruitment this academic year, for the past two weekends. The fraternity is not even pretending to care about the neighborhood even though they know their use permit is subject to a City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. This emphasizes the need for clear conditions in the CUP that outline the conditions/rules for and the consequences of the fraternity use. Conditions are necessary and also beneficial for the community and the fraternity because they clarify the expectations and mitigate the impact of use. As mentioned, a fraternity's use is not “by-right” in an R-4 zone. The reason a CUP is required - to set forth conditions to resolve the negative impacts - is so the fraternity house(s) fits into the R-4 zone as a residential use. I am baffled at the City’s resistance to strengthening the CUP for this large, impactful fraternity use. This CUP will be a model for other fraternity CUPs. It is critical that it contains meaningful conditions that make the fraternity’s obligations clear and mitigate its impact on the neighborhood. I urge you to uphold the appeal to add conditions to the fraternity CUP for the good of the neighborhood and the fraternity, so everyone knows what is expected because it’s listed as a condition in the CUP. Thank you, Kathie Walker 127 From:Jeff Eidelman < Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 8:27 AM To:Shoresman, Michelle Subject:Re: Tuesday night’s meeting Thank you Michelle! Jeff Sent from my iPad (SupercalifragilisƟcexpialidocious)! > On Oct 14, 2024, at 5:14 PM, Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > I think there is some mis-interpretaƟon happening and some miscommunicaƟon between the staff and residents, so I intend to try and get some clarificaƟons before the meeƟng this week to try and get clear myself, about what will be permiƩed (in terms of noise...as I don't believe the CUP or a special event permit creates an exemp Ɵon to municipal code) and what will not, in each of the circumstance described...CUP or Event Permit. I have already submiƩed several quesƟons to staff. > > Thank you for wriƟng in. > > Michelle > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Eidelman < > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 1:38 AM > To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> > Subject: Tuesday night’s meeƟng > > > > This message is from an External Source. Use cau Ɵon when deciding to open aƩachments, click links, or respond. > > ________________________________ > > Although I am currently not home, I want to make a few comments on the noise issues with the frat houses on the 1200 block of Foothill. Over the last year I have contacted the Police about a dozen Ɵmes for an all aŌernoon, loud raucous parƟes coming each week from this area. I live off of Kentucky and Hathway and the decibel level far exceeds 85 db according to the app on my phone. Once the police went out three Ɵmes in one day and the students aƩempted to inƟmidate the police, due to their numbers. What city staff says is an excepƟon to the rules is truly BS, pardon my French. The ciƟzens of San Luis Obispo should not have to put up with this kind of noise level and it is certainly not impinging on any students ‘rights’ to a Ʃend Cal Poly. I beg you to repudiate this ridiculous request to allow these fraterniƟes to blow us all away. How many Ɵmes, in how many years do we have to keep asking for reasonable rules and regulaƟons to have normalcy in our neighborhoods? > Thank you > Jeff Eidelman > San Luis Obispo > Sent from my iPhone, where typo's are now the rule, not the excep Ɵon! > > 129 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, October 14, 2024 7:17 AM To:Shoresman, Michelle; Hanh, Hannah Cc:McDonald, Whitney; Corey, Tyler Subject:Re: 6b Conditional Use Permit for Fraternity Michelle, Received, thank you! We will pull together answers and get them over to you. Thanks, Timmi From: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 7:00:09 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Cc: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: 6b Conditional Use Permit for Fraternity Hi Timmi and Hanna, I have a few questions about this item, both based on my own read of the material and based on some emails we have received. I will lay some of them out here, but if it would be easier to talk, let me know. I meant to watch the Planning Commission meeting on this topic, but haven’t had time yet, so apologies if the answers are there. Also, forgive me if some of these are basic questions, but I think it might be informative to the public to understand what a CUP is, and what it allows or requires an entity to do. It seems like there might be some confusion on that basic info, based on the emails we have gotten. 1. What is a CUP and do all fraternities and sororities have to have them? 2. Where did the maximum number of people come from (48) and why is the formula 32 x 1.5 reference on page 526 of the packet? 3. Issue #7 lists the following quote that the appellant is asking be added to the CUP. As I understand it, they are asking this to be added to make explicit, even if codified elsewhere, the potential ramifications of violation. Is there any harm in adding this clause to the CUP? 4. On page 549 of the packet, there are three events referenced during the current school year that would require a special event permit (above and beyond their CUP, if approved). So these permits allow a group to violate the noise ordinances? 5. Also, do special events permits allow the entity to have more than 48 people onsite after 10pm? Does the CUP alone allow them to have more than 48 people onsite after 10pm? 130 6. According to one of the emails we received, the CUPs of other fraternities have conditions listed in them even if they are already codified in SLOMC. Is there a reason not to follow past precedence on this? 7. The Appellant is requesting that there be a threshold for the number of violations that would “trigger” a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission, but if I am understanding staff’s response correctly, as currently written, only one violation could take the CUP to the Planning Commission. Is that correct? Who will determine whether a CUP will be re-reviewed, or will it automatically be after only the first violation? 8. Can you clarify…does a CUP stay in place at a property even if the property changes hands or does it stay with the organization that holds the property? Thanks. That’s it for now. I may ask some of these at the meeting still, but wanted to give you a heads up. Michelle Shoresman pronouns she/her/hers Council Member Office of the City Council 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mshoresm@slocity.org C 805.888.1973 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 135 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Sunday, October 13, 2024 9:35 PM To:Scott, Rick Subject:Re: Fraternity Enforcement Meeting Hi, Intent is that it is in-person, but Teresa asked me to add a teams link for Whitney. Sorry for the confusion! Timmi From: Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 9:32:48 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity Enforcement Meeting Is this in-person or over Teams? R. Scott > On Oct 13, 2024, at 8:18 PM, Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> wrote: > > Teams Link Added > ________________________________________________________________________________ > Microsoft Teams Need help?<https://aka.ms/JoinTeamsMeeting?omkt=en-US> > Join the meeting now<https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup- join/19%3ameeting_NGU2MmRhZTgtMDEwOS00YjU1LWIxMDEtMmJmNTU1OTM5MTlk%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%2 2Tid%22%3a%22a78b182d-94e4-4507-a9a9-330dcb148164%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%228018501e-c376-48e4-8b2c- 4f708123ea42%22%7d> > Meeting ID: 285 141 629 713 > Passcode: 7BVNct > ________________________________ > For organizers: Meeting options<https://teams.microsoft.com/meetingOptions/?organizerId=8018501e-c376-48e4- 8b2c-4f708123ea42&tenantId=a78b182d-94e4-4507-a9a9- 330dcb148164&threadId=19_meeting_NGU2MmRhZTgtMDEwOS00YjU1LWIxMDEtMmJmNTU1OTM5MTlk@thread.v2&me ssageId=0&language=en-US> > ________________________________________________________________________________ > 137 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Sunday, October 13, 2024 8:17 PM To:Hanh, Hannah; Corey, Tyler; Cohen, Rachel Subject:RE: 10/15 CC - Fraternity Appeal Thank you, Hannah, I added a few comments, let me know if you cannot see them (it says its having a hard time saving my changes…) Thanks, T From: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 3:24 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Cohen, Rachel <rcohen@slocity.org> Subject: 10/15 CC - Fraternity Appeal Hi all, For your review, here is my draft presentation: 2024 10 15 CC - Appeal Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 143 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Sunday, October 13, 2024 7:50 PM To:kathie walker Subject:RE: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) Hi again Kathie. I can certainly understand that! My husband and I definitely don’t agree on everything either! 뇤눈눉눊눍눋눌 It is my understanding that the having a CUP does not make it so you are exempt from following the Municipal Code. That’s why staff, I think, do not see a reason to repetitiously not conditions in the CUP that are already part of Muni. Code. But, I can see from your email, and others that this is not necessarily clear in the staff response. I plan to ask some clarifying questions about that as well as about the special event permits. As I know you know, the property in question here, is also in an R-4 Zone. So, while it may not be terribly far from R-1 zoned-area, it has different rules that apply about density. It is my understanding that this is why a condition was added about notifying neighbors within 300 feet of the site. I know that I have had college neighbors in my neighborhood over the years as well, and I have always appreciated when they give me their contact info (which they are not really required to do, but it’s a “good neighbor” thing to do) so that I can reach out when things get too loud). The CUP essentially requires this, as written now. Thanks. I will look through Steven’s email as well and see if it has any other things I should ask about as well. Michelle From: kathie walker < Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 2:20 PM To: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) Hi Michelle, Yes, Steve is my husband. We don't necessarily agree on everything. lol "I read the full appeal document, and the new added language to the CUP that resulted from the Planning Commission Meeting. It appears that the team and Commission has addressed some of your concerns with their amendments. But, perhaps not all." The added language to the CUP implies that the fraternity can violate the noise ordinance if they get a Special Event Permit, and is asking for at least 4 events for this academic year. During the Planning Commission hearing, the Staff said that it is possible to get a permit that allows the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance. In the Staff's response to a condition that the fraternity not be allowed to violate the noise ordinance with a Special Event Permit, the Staff cites that it's allowed under SLOMC Section 9.12.100 in accordance with Section 17.86.260(B)(5) which specifically states that events can only be approved "with NO POTENTIAL to detrimentally affect those working and living in the vicinity". Staff also cites required findings listed in Section 17.108.040, including that the approved event is "consistent with or an improvement to the character of the neighborhood." Considering these factors and hurdles, it is impossible for the fraternity to overcome these requirements. The point made in my email is that it should not be listed as an option because it sets up expectations that the fraternity can get such permits when it is not possible if you consider what is required by the SLOMC. 144 On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 1:45 PM Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Kathie, Thanks for the email. I read the full appeal document, and the new added language to the CUP that resulted from the Planning Commission Meeting. It appears that the team and Commission has addressed some of your concerns with their amendments. But, perhaps not all. Forgive me for being direct, but of all that you note below, can you please tell me some specific suggestions for what you would like changed about the current CUP that has not been addressed? Enforcement is something that we will continue, as you know, to work on regardless of the approval of this CUP or not. Especially at certain times of the year, there is no way for our “city eyes” to be everywhere at once, in a city of 48,000 residents. So, we will continue to rely on neighborhood members to report when bad things and disruptions when they are happening. Thank you. From: kathie walker < Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 11:04 AM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear City Councilmembers, In June 2024, City Planner Hannah Hanh told me that the conditions of the CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha were based on the two most recent CUPs, which are for two sororities. Each has limited occupancy of 6 and 7 residents, respectively. Fraternity use is much different than sorority use because sororities don’t have parties with alcohol. Sororities go to fraternity houses to party, and fraternities have large parties with alcohol that are extremely disruptive to their neighbors. Even if the City considers sororities and fraternities as the same use, conditions must be added to the proposed CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha to mitigate the known, documented problems associated with noise and fraternity use. The municipal code states that violating the City’s noise ordinance is a public nuisance, is detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of others, and is contrary to public interest. On the other hand, the Staff Report claims that there are “exceptions” to the City’s noise ordinance that enable the Community Development Director to approve Special Event Permits, and such events are allowed to violate the City’s noise ordinance. 145 I can understand issuing a Special Event Permit to allow greater occupancy during certain hours of operation, such as during the day for an event, however allowing a permit to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood, especially at night, is not reasonable. The municipal code cited by Staff (SLOMC 9.12.100) says that any “exceptions” that allow violation of the noise ordinance can only be granted if all the following three conditions are met: 1. It is subject to limitations “appropriate to protect the public health, safety and welfare from the noise emanating therefrom”, 2. If the [fraternity] applicant can demonstrate that bringing the source of sound or activity into compliance with the noise ordinance “would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the [fraternity] applicant, on the community, or on other persons”, and 3. Must balance the denial [not being allowed to have an event that violates the noise ordinance] as a hardship on the applicant against (1) the adverse impact on the health, safety, and welfare of other persons affected; (2) the adverse impact on property affected; and (3) any other adverse impacts of granting the exception [to allow a fraternity party to violate the noise ordinance]. I’m unsure what limitations cited in item 1. could prevent the neighbors from hearing an outdoor fraternity party with 100 people and/or amplified noise, especially at night when people are trying to sleep, and when the noise ordinance prohibits amplified noise from crossing the property line. Is it truly a “hardship” if the fraternity is not allowed to host an amplified event in a residential neighborhood that viola tes the noise ordinance? The fraternity representative said they will have at least 4 events over the next 9 months that will require Special Event Permits. The fraternity should host those events at a third-party venue so the people living nearby are able to sleep and be rested for work, school, or other life obligations. There are 19 fraternities at Cal Poly. How many events that violate the noise ordinance (considered by the SLOMC to be a public nuisance, detrimental to health, welfare, and safety, and contrary to public interest ) should the City’s neighborhoods endure? Another factor that isn’t mentioned is that sororities and other guests walk through the neighborhoods to attend these events. They yell, especially after they’ve been drinking, coming and going from the events and this goes on for hours. Fraternity parties impact the neighborhood beyond the fraternity house, itself. The “hardship” of living near a fraternity is borne by the neighbors who are kept awake by loud fraternity parties. There is no way to balance or mitigate the adverse impact for those living and working nearby. It is not reasonable to allow events within a residential neighborhood that violate the noise ordinance which, according to the City’s municipal code, is detrimental to pe ople’s health, safety, and welfare and is a public nuisance. Our family is impacted by fraternities on Foothill Blvd. We can hear them from our house. At times we thought the noise was coming from a block over on Bond St or Hathway Ave because it was so loud, but upon locating the source of the noise, we found the party was at a fraternity on Foothill. A video link to one recent event at a fraternity on Foothill that could be heard from our house is included in my previous correspondence to the Planning Commission. I have attached my correspondence to this email. It took three responses from SLOPD to shut down the fraternity party on Foothill Blvd and officers had to call their sergeant to the scene because the fraternity refused to stop the disruptive party! I’ve wondered if there were any consequences to that fraternity, other than the noise citations. Our family needs to sleep due to work and other family obligations. If my husband can’t sleep, he cannot go to work because he has a safety-related job, and if he can’t work it affects our family’s income. Using the balancing factors cited by City staff, o utlined in SLOMC 9.12.100, a “hardship” on a fraternity for not being able to host large parties with amplified noise in violation of the noise ordinance, does not outweigh the protection of the neighborhood and allowing people to sleep so they can go to work. I honestly can’t believe I have to say this because it seems like common sense. There are obvious blind spots within the City Administration when it comes to dealing with the “fraternity situation” overall, understanding/enforcing the noise they generate, and enforcing the existing CUPs for permitted fraternity houses that flout the law, even when a written complaint is made. There are also 70+ documented illegal fraternity houses operating as full-fledged fraternity houses throughout the City’s neighborhoods, many operating as the main chapter houses for their fraternities, and they 146 are still going strong a year after I gave a detailed report to Community Development with documentation of the fraternity locations, including fraternities' social media posts. Cal Poly’s AB 524 report also documented the address locations of fraternity events, which confirmed the social media documentation I provided in my report. The standard of proof required to cite these illegal fraternities is a “preponderance of the evidence” which means it is more likely than not. The documentation adequately met that burden, yet the fraternities continue to operate illegally at the addresses that were identified a year ago. Unfortunately, many of those addresses, including the main chapter houses of some fraternities, were not sent Notices of Violation or Advisory Letters. Some were, but even then, some Notices of Violation were missing dates, and many of the Advisory Letters were lost by the Community Development Department, so there is no physical record. I was asked to use the AskSLO app to make reports and did so, but most of the reports I made that specifically identified dates, times, and addresses of illegal fraternity events were not followed up on during the dates, times, and addresses provided to the Community Development Department so were dismissed as unfounded, even though the events occurred. The "fraternity situation" has been so disheartening. And now I am even more baffled after reading the City Staff's arguments AGAINST addition conditions to the fraternity's CUP which promotes wellness in the neighborhood. Is it because Community Development staff are already so overburdened that they don't want to take responsibility for enforcing the CUP? I can't think of any other logical explanation to justify not having a threshold of violations that trigger a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission. Under the “exceptions” cited by City Staff that would allow the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance (9.12.100. A.2.), the municipal code also says, “Any individual who claims to be adversely affected by an allowance of the exception may file a statement with the noise control officer containing any information to support his or her claim. If at any time the noise control officer finds that a sufficient controversy exists regarding an application, a public hearing will be held.” How does “any individual” know that the fraternity has applied for an “exception” to host an event in violation of the noise ordinance? Are neighbors notified before the noise control officer grants the exception so they "have an opportunity file a statement with the noise control officer"? The Staff report says a Special Event Permit can only be approved with the three required findings listed in SLOMC 17.108.040. Finding 2 says the event “is consistent with or an improvement to the character of the neighborhood or zone.” A fraternity party does not improve the character of the neighborhood. Also, a fraternity is not allowed “by right” in an R-4 neighborhood. The CUP is meant to include conditions that mitigate the impact of fraternity use so that the fraternity house fits into the residential neighborhood, as a residence that is permitted to hold gatherings of up to a certain amount of people during certain hours. People of all demographics live in our neighborhood. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario that would be considered an improvement to the character of the neighborhood by allowing a fraternity event to violate the noise ordinance. Please limit Special Event Permits to allow an increase in occupancy limitations for events, and do not allow events to violate the City's noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. Appeal Issue No. 3 – Limitation reverts to “residential occupancy” limit per condition 4 at night from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. The appeal also asks for a limitation on occupancy from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. based on the maximum allowed residential occupancy limitation listed in condition 4, which says “The fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 24 residents for the property.” The Staff Response says that the condition cannot limit the type of people (residents vs. non-residents) but acknowledges that it is permissible to limit the number of people for the use. While the wording of the condition cannot list the limitation to residents, it is legal to limit the occupancy to 24 after 10 p.m. Condition 5 limits the number of people for “routine meetings and gatherings” to 48. The reason the limitation of persons on site after 10 p.m. is included in other fraternity CUPs and is requested here is that the noise generated by 48 people is much greater than the noise generated by 24 people. This is a residence in a residential neighborhood. The fraternity representative told the Planning Commission that gatherings happen outdoors, between the front and back houses. Noise generated by 48 people would violate the noise ordinance and disturb the neighbors. 147 The primary concern about the fraternity’s use is noise. I know the noise ordinance isn’t that interesting but here are some main points: -The noise ordinance is a 24/7 regulation and prohibits a "noise disturbance" that is plainly audible 50 feet from the noisemaker. The dictionary defines a "noise disturbance" as the interruption of a settled and peaceful condition. -Amplified sound (television, radio, etc.) is prohibited from crossing the property line after 10 p.m. - Depending on the "character of sound", for example, if the noise contains music or speech, it cannot exceed 45 decibels acros s the property line after 10 p.m. for 30 minutes, which is equivalent to the sound level in a library. Noise that includes music or speech at 65 decibels is prohibited from crossing the property line, which is equivalent to the sound level of a normal conversation. These are the standards outlined in the City’s noise ordinance. There are free apps you can download on your phone that measure decibel levels and it’s surprising how “loud” everyday things are, such as a conversation, which can be disturbing at night when ambient noise levels are low and people nearby are trying to sleep. Limiting the number of people after 10 p.m. is consistent with the required findings per SLOMC 17.86.130, which is also cited in the Findings of the Draft Resolution and states “the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities … and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties.” Nighttime, after 10 p.m., is a sensitive time when most people are trying to sleep, and it is a reasonable condition to limit the number of people on the property to 24 from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Please add this condition to the fraternity’s CUP. Land Use and Housing Elements in the General Plan The Findings in the Draft Resolution state that the project is consistent with the General Plan because “the project would facilitate Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 and Housing Element Policy 8.6 (sic) by locating a fraternity in proximity to the Cal Poly SLO campus.” For context, the first sentence of Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 states, “The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate fraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board.” The secondary portion of the policy says, “If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to medium-high and high-density residential areas near campus.” Please consider the intended meaning of this policy. Allowing more and more fraternities to overtake the residential neighborhoods does not further this policy. The first sentence of Housing Element Policy 8.5 says, “Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus . And secondarily, “Until that is possible, they should be located in medium-high to high-density residential zones near campus.” (Policy 8.6, referenced in the Draft Resolution, refers to Cal Poly staff housing and is not applicable here.) Again, the primary sentence in this policy is for fraternities to be located on campus, not in the City's neighborhoods. Allowing more fraternities in the City does not "facilitate" the intended meaning of these policies in the General Plan, as claimed in the Draft Resolution. Housing Element Program 8.15 says, “Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus fraternity/sorority living groups.” That portion of the General Plan was not included in the Draft Resolution. These Programs and Policies were adopted ten years ago, in 2014. What has the City done to further their implementation? The City’s General Plan recognizes that fraternities and sororities do not belong in the City and should be located on Cal Poly’s campus. The Planning Commissioners also said that fraternities should be on Cal Poly’s campus. Since Cal Poly does not have a Greek Row, the burden of housing the fraternities falls on the City and its neighborhoods. To mitigate the negative impacts of a fraternity in a residential neighborhood, a CUP must have conditions that specifically address relevant issues, and those conditions should be listed in the CUP so they are clear to the fraternity. Specific conditions that address common issues for a fraternity’s use should be included in the CUP to establish clear communication of the 148 expectations and the consequences for the fraternity if they don’t adhere to the listed conditions. For instance, the following condition is included in other fraternity CUPs, which was requested in the appeal, and makes sense: “Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, s afety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit.” The City Staff implies that the fraternity already has to follow this condition of use because it must follow Federal, State, and local laws and the obligation is listed throughout Chapter 17 of the SLOMC, so it doesn't need to be included as a condition. If it’s not listed as a condition in the CUP, how does the fraternity know that it’s a condition of use? Also, any written complaints, es pecially by community members, are based on the conditions outlined in the CUP. It's confusing if the condition is not specifically listed as a condition in the CUP. This condition and others suggested in the appeal, should be included in the CUP so the conditions are clear to the fraternit y and the community. Finally, you might think that Lambda Chi Alpha would be on their best behavior in anticipation of this appeal. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month, so it seems simple: Don’t have loud parties that violate the noise ordinance and don’t have more than the maximum occupancy of 48 as outlined in the CUP before the City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. But in the past few weeks, the fraternity has had multiple calls to SLOPD for noise. (None were made by me or my family.) During the first week of classes a call was made to SLOPD and the dispatcher noted in the log that the fraternity was partying in the front yard at 1264 Foothill with a sign that said, “YOU HONK, WE DRINK”. After that, there were at least two more loud parties at night and were issued noise citations at 1264 Foothill on 10/2/2024 and 10/9/2024. One citation lists 70 people at the party. During the Planning Commission hearing, the Chair asked the fraternity representative, Thomas Symer, if Lambda Chi Alpha had any satellite houses that held fraternity events in the neighborhood. Mr. Symer said they did not. However, that isn’t true. Lambda Chi Alpha has at least five illegal fraternity houses in the Alta Vista neighborhood that held documented fraternity events during the last academic year, including at 171 Orange, 12 Hathway, 253 Albert, and 278 Albert. Mr. Symer’s name was listed as the person cited at a fraternity event at one of those addresses. Lambda Chi Alpha has continued to hold illegal fraternity events at those addresses during rush recruitment this academic year, for the past two weekends. 149 The fraternity is not even pretending to care about the neighborhood even though they know their use permit is subject to a City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. This emphasizes the need for clear conditions in the CUP that outline the conditions/rules for a nd the consequences of the fraternity use. Conditions are necessary and also beneficial for the community and the fraternity because they clarify the expectations and mitigate the impact of use. As mentioned, a fraternity's use is not “by-right” in an R-4 zone. The reason a CUP is required - to set forth conditions to resolve the negative impacts - is so the fraternity house(s) fits into the R-4 zone as a residential use. I am baffled at the City’s resistance to strengthening the CUP for this large, impactful fraternity use. This CUP will be a model for other fraternity CUPs. It is critical that it contains meaningful conditions that make the fraternity’s obligations clear and mitigate its impact on the neighborhood. I urge you to uphold the appeal to add conditions to the fraternity CUP for the good of the neighborhood and the fraternity, so everyone knows what is expected because it’s listed as a condition in the CUP. Thank you, Kathie Walker 163 From:kathie walker < Sent:Sunday, October 13, 2024 11:04 AM To:Marx, Jan; Shoresman, Michelle; Stewart, Erica A; Pease, Andy; Francis, Emily; E-mail Council Website Subject:Item 6b on 10/15/2024: Appeal to Add Conditions to Fraternity Use Permit (Lambda Chi Alpha) Attachments:Kathie Walker letter to Planning Commission..pdf This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear City Councilmembers, In June 2024, City Planner Hannah Hanh told me that the conditions of the CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha were based on the two most recent CUPs, which are for two sororities. Each has limited occupancy of 6 and 7 residents, respectively. Fraternity use is much different than sorority use because sororities don’t have parties with alcohol. Sororities go to fraternity houses to party, and fraternities have large parties with alcohol that are extremely disruptive to their neighbors. Even if the City considers sororities and fraternities as the same use, conditions must be added to the proposed CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha to mitigate the known, documented problems associated with noise and fraternity use. The municipal code states that violating the City’s noise ordinance is a public nuisance, is detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of others, and is contrary to public interest. On the other hand, the Staff Report claims that there are “exceptions” to the City’s noise ordinance that enable the Community Development Director to approve Special Event Permits, and such events are allowed to violate the City’s noise ordinance. I can understand issuing a Special Event Permit to allow greater occupancy during certain hours of operation, such as during the day for an event, however allowing a permit to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood, especially at night, is not reasonable. The municipal code cited by Staff (SLOMC 9.12.100) says that any “exceptions” that allow violation of the noise ordinance can only be granted if all the following three conditions are met: 1. It is subject to limitations “appropriate to protect the public health, safety and welfare from the noise emanating therefrom”, 2. If the [fraternity] applicant can demonstrate that bringing the source of sound or activity into compliance with the noise ordinance “would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the [fraternity] applicant, on the community, or on other persons”, and 3. Must balance the denial [not being allowed to have an event that violates the noise ordinance] as a hardship on the applicant against (1) the adverse impact on the health, safety, and welfare of other persons affected; (2) the adverse impact on property affected; and (3) any other adverse impacts of granting the exception [to allow a fraternity party to violate the noise ordinance]. I’m unsure what limitations cited in item 1. could prevent the neighbors from hearing an outdoor fraternity party with 100 people and/or amplified noise, especially at night when people are trying to sleep, and when the noise ordinance prohibits amplified noise from crossing the property line. Is it truly a “hardship” if the fraternity is not allowed to host an amplified event in a residential neighborhood that violates the noise ordinance? The fraternity representative said they will have at least 4 events over the next 9 months that will requi re Special Event Permits. The fraternity should host those events at a third-party venue so the people living nearby are able to sleep and be rested for work, school, or other life obligations. There are 19 fraternities at Cal Poly. How many events that violate the noise ordinance (considered by the SLOMC to be a public nuisance, detrimental to health, welfare, and safety, and contrary to public interest ) should the City’s neighborhoods endure? Another factor that isn’t mentioned is that sororities and other guests walk through the neighborhoods to attend these events. They yell, especially after they’ve been drinking, coming and going from the events and this goes on for hours. Fraternity parties impact the neighborhood beyond the fraternity house, itself. 164 The “hardship” of living near a fraternity is borne by the neighbors who are kept awake by loud fraternity parties. There is no way to balance or mitigate the adverse impact for those living and working nearby. It is not reasonable to allow events within a residential neighborhood that violate the noise ordinance which, according to the City’s municipal code, is detrimental to people’s health, safety, and welfare and is a public nuisance. Our family is impacted by fraternities on Foothill Blvd. We can hear them from our house. At times we thought the noise was coming from a block over on Bond St or Hathway Ave because it was so loud, but upon locating the source of the noise, we found the party was at a fraternity on Foothill. A video link to one recent event at a fraternity on Foothill that could be heard from our house is included in my previous correspondence to the Planning Commission. I have attached my correspondence to this email. It took three responses from SLOPD to shut down the fraternity party on Foothill Blvd and officers had to call their sergeant to the scene because the fraternity refused to stop the disruptive party! I’ve wondered if there were any consequences to that fraternity, other than the noise citations. Our family needs to sleep due to work and other family obligations. If my husband can’t sleep, he cannot go to work because he has a safety-related job, and if he can’t work it affects our family’s income. Using the balancing factors cited by City staff, outlined in SLOMC 9.12.100, a “hardship” on a fraternity for not being able to host large parties with amplified noise in violation of the noise ordinance, does not outweigh the protection of the neighborhood and allowing people to sleep so they can go to work. I honestly can’t believe I have to say this because it seems like common sense. There are obvious blind spots within the City Administration when it comes to dealing with the “fraternity situation” overall, understanding/enforcing the noise they generate, and enforcing the existing CUPs for permitted fraternity houses that flout the law, even when a written complaint is made. There are also 70+ documented illegal fraternity houses operating as full-fledged fraternity houses throughout the City’s neighborhoods, many operating as the main chapter houses for their fraternities, and they are still going strong a year after I gave a detailed report to Community Development with documentation of the fraternity locations, including fraternities' social media posts. Cal Poly’s AB 524 report also documented the address locations of fraternity events, which confirmed the social media documentation I provided in my report. The standard of proof required to cite these illegal fraternities is a “preponderance of the evidence” which means it is more likely than not. The documentation adequately met that burden, yet the fraternities continue to operate illegally at the addresses that were identified a year ago. Unfortunately, many of those addresses, including the main chapter houses of some fraternities, were not sent Notices of Viol ation or Advisory Letters. Some were, but even then, some Notices of Violation were missing dates, and many of the Advisory Letters were lost by the Community Development Department, so there is no physical record. I was asked to use the AskSLO app to make reports and did so, but most of the reports I made that specifically identified dates, times, and addresses of illegal fraternity events were not followed up on during the dates, times, and addresses provided to the Community Development Department so were dismissed as unfounded, even though the events occurred. The "fraternity situation" has been so disheartening. And now I am even more baffled after reading the City Staff's arguments AGAINST addition conditions to the fraternity's CUP which promotes wellness in the neighborhood. Is it because Community Development staff are already so overburdened that they don't want to take responsibility for enforcing the CUP? I can't think of any other logical explanation to justify not having a threshold of violations that trigger a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission. Under the “exceptions” cited by City Staff that would allow the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance (9.12.100. A.2.), the municipal code also says, “Any individual who claims to be adversely affected by an allowance of the exception may file a statement with the noise control officer containing any information to support his or her claim. If at any time the noise control officer finds that a sufficient controversy exists regarding an application, a public hearing will be held.” How does “any individual” know that the fraternity has applied for an “exception” to host an event in violation of the noise ordinance? Are neighbors notified before the noise control officer grants the exception so they "have an opportunity file a statement with the noise control officer"? The Staff report says a Special Event Permit can only be approved with the three required findings listed in SLOMC 17.108.040. Finding 2 says the event “is consistent with or an improvement to the character of the neighborhood or zone.” A fraternity party does not improve the character of the neighborhood. Also, a fraternity is not allowed “by right” in an R-4 neighborhood. The CUP is meant to include conditions that mitigate the impact of fraternity use so that the fraternity house fits into the residential neighborhood, as a residence that is permitted to hold gatherings of up to a certain amount of people during certain hours. People of all demographics live in our neighborhood. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario that would be considered an improvement to the character of the neighborhood by allowing a fraternity event to violate the noise ordinance. 165 Please limit Special Event Permits to allow an increase in occupancy limitations for events, and do not allow events to violate the City's noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. Appeal Issue No. 3 – Limitation reverts to “residential occupancy” limit per condition 4 at night from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. The appeal also asks for a limitation on occupancy from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. based on the maximum allowed residential occupancy limitation listed in condition 4, which says “The fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 24 residents for the property.” The Staff Response says that the condition cannot limit the type of people (residents vs. non-residents) but acknowledges that it is permissible to limit the number of people for the use. While the wording of the condition cannot list the limitation to residents, it is legal to limit the occupancy to 24 after 10 p.m. Condition 5 limits the number of people for “routine meetings and gatherings” to 48. The reason the limitation of persons on site after 10 p.m. is included in other fraternity CUPs and is requested here is that the noise generated by 48 people is much greater than the noise generated by 24 people. This is a residence in a residential neighborhood. The fraternity representative told the Planning Commission that gatherings happen outdoors, between the front and back houses. Noise generated by 48 people would violate the noise ordinance and disturb the neighbors. The primary concern about the fraternity’s use is noise. I know the noise ordinance isn’t that interesting but here are some main points: -The noise ordinance is a 24/7 regulation and prohibits a "noise disturbance" that is plainly audible 50 feet from the noisemaker. The dictionary defines a "noise disturbance" as the interruption of a settled and peaceful condition. -Amplified sound (television, radio, etc.) is prohibited from crossing the property line after 10 p.m. - Depending on the "character of sound", for example, if the noise contains music or speech, it cannot exceed 45 decibels across the property line after 10 p.m. for 30 minutes, which is equivalent to the sound level in a library. Noise that includes music or speech at 65 decibels is prohibited from crossing the property line, which is equivalent to the sound level of a normal conversation. These are the standards outlined in the City’s noise ordinance. There are free apps you can download on your phone that measure decibel levels and it’s surprising how “loud” everyday things are, such as a conversation, which can be disturbing at night when ambient noise levels are low and people nearby are trying to sleep. Limiting the number of people after 10 p.m. is consistent with the required findings per SLOMC 17.86.130, which is also cited in the Findings of the Draft Resolution and states “the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities … and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties.” Nighttime, after 10 p.m., is a sensitive time when most people are trying to sleep, and it is a reasonable condition to limit the number of people on the property to 24 from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Please add this condition to the fraternity’s CUP. Land Use and Housing Elements in the General Plan The Findings in the Draft Resolution state that the project is consistent with the General Plan because “the project would facilitate Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 and Housing Element Policy 8.6 (sic) by locating a fraternity in proximity to the Cal Poly SLO campus.” For context, the first sentence of Land Use Element Policy 2.6.5 states, “The City shall work with Cal Poly to develop a proposal to locate fraternities and sororities on campus for consideration by the CSU Board.” The secondary portion of the policy says, “If locations on campus cannot be provided, fraternities and sororities should be limited to medium-high and high-density residential areas near campus.” Please consider the intended meaning of this policy. Allowing more and more fraternities to overtake the residential neighborhoods does not further this policy. The first sentence of Housing Element Policy 8.5 says, “Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. And secondarily, “Until that is possible, they should be located in medium-high to high-density residential zones near campus.” (Policy 8.6, referenced in the Draft Resolution, refers to Cal Poly staff housing and is not applicable here.) Again, the primary sentence in this policy is for fraternities to be located on campus, not in the City's neighborhoods. Allowing more fraternities in the City does not "facilitate" the intended meaning of these policies in the General Plan, as claimed in the Draft Resolution. Housing Element Program 8.15 says, “Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus fraternity/sorority living groups.” That portion of the General Plan was not included in the Draft Resolution. 166 These Programs and Policies were adopted ten years ago, in 2014. What has the City done to further their implementation? The City’s General Plan recognizes that fraternities and sororities do not belong in the City and should be located on Cal Poly’s campus. The Planning Commissioners also said that fraternities should be on Cal Poly’s campus. Since Cal Poly does not have a Greek Row, the burden of housing the fraternities falls on the City and its neighborhoods. To mitigate the negative impacts of a fraternity in a residential neighborhood, a CUP must have conditions that specifically address relevant issues, and those conditions should be listed in the CUP so they are clear to the fraternity. Specific conditions that address common issues for a fraternity’s use should be included in the CUP to establish clear communication of the expectations and the consequences for the fraternity if they don’t adhere to the listed conditions. For instance, the following condition is included in other fraternity CUPs, which was requested in the appeal, and makes sense: “Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State, or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit.” The City Staff implies that the fraternity already has to follow this condition of use because it must follow Federal, State, and local laws and the obligation is listed throughout Chapter 17 of the SLOMC, so it doesn't need to be included as a condition. If it’s not listed as a condition in the CUP, how does the fraternity know that it’s a condition of use? Also, any written complaints, especially by community members, are based on the conditions outlined in the CUP. It's confusing if the condition is not specifically listed as a condition in the CUP. This condition and others suggested in the appeal, should be included in the CUP so the conditions are clear to the fraternity and the community. Finally, you might think that Lambda Chi Alpha would be on their best behavior in anticipation of this appeal. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month, so it seems simple: Don’t have loud parties that violate the noise ordinance and don’t have more t han the maximum occupancy of 48 as outlined in the CUP before the City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. But in the past few weeks, the fraternity has had multiple calls to SLOPD for noise. (None were made by me or my family.) During the first week of classes a call was made to SLOPD and the dispatcher noted in the log that the fraternity was partying in the front yard at 1264 Foothill with a sign that said, “YOU HONK, WE DRINK”. After that, there were at least two more loud parties at night and were issued noise citations at 1264 Foothill on 10/2/2024 and 10/9/2024. One citation lists 70 people at the party. During the Planning Commission hearing, the Chair asked the fraternity representative, Thomas Symer, if Lambda Chi Alpha had any satellite houses that held fraternity events in the neighborhood. Mr. Symer said they did not. However, that isn’t true. Lambda Chi Alpha has at least five illegal fraternity houses in the Alta Vista neighborhood that held documented fraternity events during the last academic year, including at 171 Orange, 12 Hathway, 253 Albert, and 278 Albert. Mr. Symer’s name was listed as the person cited at a fraternity event at one of those addresses. Lambda Chi Alpha has continued to hold illegal fraternity events at those addresses during rush recruitment this academic year, for the past two weekends. 167 The fraternity is not even pretending to care about the neighborhood even though they know their use permit is subject to a City Council hearing on 10/15/2024. This emphasizes the need for clear conditions in the CUP that outline the conditions/rules for and the consequences of the fraternity use. Conditions are necessary and also beneficial for the community and the fraternity because they clarify the expectations and mitigate the impact of use. As mentioned, a fraternity's use is not “by-right” in an R-4 zone. The reason a CUP is required - to set forth conditions to resolve the negative impacts - is so the fraternity house(s) fits into the R-4 zone as a residential use. I am baffled at the City’s resistance to strengthening the CUP for this large, impactful fraternity use. This CUP will be a model for other fraternity CUPs. It is critical that it contains meaningful conditions that make the fraternity’s obligations clear and mitigate its impact on the neighborhood. I urge you to uphold the appeal to add conditions to the fraternity CUP for the good of the neighborhood and the fraternity, so everyone knows what is expected because it’s listed as a condition in the CUP. Thank you, Kathie Walker 1 June 6, 2024 Dear Planning Commissioners, I support Lambda Chi Alpha’s conditional use permit (CUP) for fraternity operations at 1264 & 1264 ½ Foothill Blvd and 1241, 1243, 1249 and 1251 Monte Vista Place. The conditions in a CUP are important to ensure that the neighbors of a fraternity house are not adversely impacted by fraternity operations. I feel there are some conditions missing from the CUP which are covered in more detail below. The parking suggested is good because much of our neighborhood is not a parking district and it is difficult for guests to find parking on the street. The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and applicable City development standards and regulations including section 17.86.130 A, which says, “This section is intended to promote the quality of life in residential neighborhoods by ensuring that dwelling units housing multiple persons who are members of a fraternity or sorority provide adequate support facilities for the intensity of associated use, and that such uses are operated in a manner that is not detrimental to the neighborhood in which they are located due to excessive noise, inadequate off-street parking, general property maintenance, and similar conditions…” The proposed CUP does not adequately address the noise problems associated with fraternity houses. I have been invested in the fraternity issue in our neighborhood for the last couple of years because our home has been increasingly surrounded by fraternity houses and it has negatively affected my family. I began researching the issue which led me to a understand the gravity of the situation and the City’s predicament. There are only seven fraternity CUPs but 18 fraternities in Cal Poly’s Interfraternity Council (IFC), and most fraternities have multiple house locations. The information I uncovered blew my mind, to be honest, because it’s gotten so far out of control. I spoke with Derek Johnson (previous city manager) about it, and he encouraged me to share my information with Timmi Tway who was newly hired as Community Development Director. So, I prepared a report, including detailed information about each of the fraternities and an outline of the overall situation, and provided it to Ms. Tway and John Mezzapesa during a meeting with them last year. I apologize for the length of my letter and appreciate your time to review it. The Cal Poly fraternity situation is a huge issue and is difficult to understand the scope without some context that is relevant to the proposed CUP. THE NATURE OF FRATERNITY HOUSES As fraternities have emerged in our neighborhood, I can confirm that movies like Animal House and Neighbors are not an exaggeration of the chaos that a fraternity house brings to a neighborhood. The Courts have repeatedly established that a fraternity house is a unique classification of housing that has an adverse effect on neighboring properties due to noise and other issues, therefore cities have specific zoning regulations associated with their placement in a community. There is a big difference between denser housing such as apartments or a boarding house and a fraternity house, and court rulings have consistently confirmed that fact. In Long Beach v. Sigma Alpha Epsilon, the court stated: “The facts of life dictate that there is a vast difference between a boarding house or lodging house and a fraternity house... college spirit contemplates frequent gatherings with attendant boisterous conduct on occasions. The rush parties, the dances, the rallies and other manifestations of the collegiate spirit are present in a fraternity house and frequently absent in a boarding house or an apartment.” City of Long Beach v. California Lambda Chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon, 255 Cal.App.2d 789. While a fraternity house is allowed in R-3 and R-4 zones in the City, the CUP must have conditions to address and mitigate the known issues related to a fraternity house, so it is not detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of those living and working in the neighborhood. Noise pollution (defined as an unwanted or disturbing sound) has been linked to health problems. Noise also disturbs a good night of sleep and causes difficulty falling asleep and 2 awakening, which lead to sleep deprivation and several other negative health consequences such as depressed mood, decreased cognitive performance, and fatigue1. We have many unpermitted “satellite” fraternity houses around our home, and there is one fraternity with a CUP at the end of our street. We can hear fraternity parties from our home, including at the fraternities on Foothill Blvd. Our neighborhood feels like a downtown bar district on many weekends because of the fraternity houses nearby. My husband and I have raised our sons here and our neighborhood has completely changed, especially over the past several years, specifically because of the proliferation of fraternity houses nearby. We have known and enjoyed our college-student neighbors and do not expect a perfectly quiet neighborhood. In fact, we loved the vitality of the mix of residents who lived here. When our sons were young, we carved pumpkins on our porch with college-student neighbors during Halloween season. I also participated in the production of a video for Cal Poly that was shown during W.O.W. week, promoting the relationship between long-term residents and our college student neighbors. But we no longer recognize our neighborhood, and it has become a nightmare because of the fraternity houses. I cannot begin to describe the adverse effect the “fraternity situation” has had on my and my family’s life, because we are unable to rest or enjoy our property much of the time due to the noise from fraternity houses. Fraternity parties are completely different from standard college-student parties, and fraternity house operations are completely different than standard college-student housing situations. Last year, Theta Chi fraternity moved into the rental house across the street and immediately had a fraternity party in their backyard with 700 people. At the same time, Sigma Pi fraternity moved into the rental house next door and had non-stop fraternity activities, drinking games, loud music and parties late at night, people coming and going, slamming doors, yelling throughout the night, and vomiting from their side deck near our bedroom windows due to overconsumption of alcohol. Fraternities are nocturnal operations and many of their events are centered around alcohol consumption.2 We did everything possible to work with the fraternity next door by texting them instead of calling SLOPD and we heard every excuse you can imagine. When we went over to break up an enormous fraternity party after one of their guests vomited in our front yard, some of the fraternity tenants told us that we don’t belong in this neighborhood and should move. Afterward, we decided we would no longer text them and would call SLOPD for their parties. Soon after, they received a noise citation while my husband was at work (he sometimes works nightshift) and they began harassing and cyberstalking me. Although their lease was not renewed for this year, they still dox me online, post untrue things using my full name on social media, advertise open parties at our home address, trespass onto our property near our bedroom window and say my name, and other creepy things that are caught on our video surveillance. I am not blaming this sort of activity on all fraternities. However, there is an overall entitlement that we have repeatedly experienced by many of the fraternity members in our neighborhood, that they have the right to have crazy parties whenever and however they want, and if we don’t like it, we shouldn’t live here. The unique nature of a fraternity house makes it important to set out clear terms in the CUP, from the beginning, so the fraternity and the neighborhood know what to expect. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SORORITIES & FRATERNITIES Sororities are governed by the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC) and the NPC prohibits alcohol in sorority houses and the use of Panhellenic funds for alcohol, which means that sororities cannot host parties with alcohol in 1 Citation: Noise Pollution, Southern Medical Journal. https://docs.wind-watch.org/goineshagler-noisepollution.html 2 After a Cal Poly SLO fraternity pledge, Carson Starkey, died from alcohol poisoning, the National Interfraternity Conference sent industry experts to Cal Poly to conduct an in-depth assessment of the school’s Greek system, according to university records. … The assessment, prepared by fraternity executives, college administrators and a social worker… said alcohol was “a, and perhaps THE, defining factor” of Greek life. (“Cal Poly Brings Back Freshman Pledging After Lobbying ”, Bloomberg News, October 14, 2013.) 3 their houses. They can host social events at third-party venues but mostly, sororities at Cal Poly attend fraternity parties at fraternity houses in San Luis Obispo. The fraternity houses near our home have raging parties that host different sororities on weekends throughout the academic year. Nearly every weekend that Cal Poly is in session, we see and hear large groups of females walking to and from fraternity houses in our neighborhood. Cal Poly posted a report online that lists the “sanctioned events” of every fraternity and sorority at Cal Poly during the academic year 2022-2023, including the location of each party/event held by each fraternity and sorority.3 Every sorority party event listed in the report is at the addresses of a fraternity house in San Luis Obispo, including satellite fraternity houses, or an event at a third-party venue. This is in line with the NPC policy that prohibits parties with alcohol at sorority houses. Since sorority houses don’t host large, alcohol-fueled parties, they do not have the same impact and repercussions on the neighborhood as fraternity houses. HOURS OF OPERATION After reviewing the conditions outlined in the CUP, I noticed there are some important conditions missing, such as hours of operation. The existing CUPs for other Cal Poly fraternities state that no meetings or gatherings will take place between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. This is a critical item, to ensure that noise from the fraternity doesn’t adversely impact the neighboring properties. I have attached the CUPs for every fraternity in San Luis Obispo, for your reference (Fraternity Report, pgs. 15- 50.) Of the seven CUPs for fraternities in the city, one fraternity (Sigma Nu) has two CUPs, so only six fraternities have use permits out of 18 fraternities in the IFC. Cal Poly does not provide on-campus housing for any of their fraternities and most fraternities have several houses at different addresses that operate as fraternity houses. Some CUPs for fraternities do not allow parties. For example, Sigma Nu’s CUP at 1304 Foothill, condition 11 prohibits parties except for two events per year for parents and alumni: “No hosted Greek events on the site shall be allowed (i.e. TG’s [themed gatherings], rush events, little sisters, etc.) One parents’ barbeque and one alumni barbecue may be held at the site each year. Not more than thirty-eight (38) persons may be present at either event, including fraternity members.” Condition 10 specifically prohibits the use of amplified sound at events. Condition 5 states, “No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than fraternity members living on the site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m.” and condition 3 strictly limits all fraternity activity to the house only, “for residential use”. Sigma Nu’s CUP was approved 30 years ago, and the number of fraternities at Cal Poly has increased since then, which has had a greater impact and more strain on our neighborhood. Wit h this increase, there is a responsibility to ensure that the known issues of a fraternity house are thoroughly addressed and not diluted in the CUP. The current Applicant, Lambda Chi Alpha, had a CUP for an address at 1292 Foothill Blvd. The CUP stays with the property, which is now occupied by Sigma Nu. The conditions include (condition 7) “No meetings, parties, or other types of similar activities involving persons other than the residents are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m., except as provided by the Community Development Director.” The CUP for Lambda Chi Alpha’s current application should include the same language. NOISE IMPACTS NEAR A LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD In Attachment B, the Applicant states that the property is located “steps from the Cal Poly campus” but it is important to note that it is also steps from an R-1 & R-2 residential neighborhood with many long-term residents and others who are impacted by the fraternity. (See neighborhood map, below) 3 The AB 524 Report is mandated by Assembly Bill 524: The Campus Recognized Fraternity and Sorority Transparency Act, and is posted on Cal Poly’s Greek Life webpage, beginning 10/1/2023, and annually thereafter. The report for this academic year (2023-2024) will be posted on 10/1/2024. 4 Fraternity parties on Foothill Blvd can be heard from blocks away. Noise travels throughout the neighborhood and it is difficult to tell where it is coming from unless you walk to the party to find the exact location. Many times, I have thought a party was the next block over, and was surprised it was at a fraternity three blocks away on Foothill Blvd. There are so many examples, but I’ll describe a recent incident on Memorial Day weekend which illustrates how we are affected by fraternity parties on Foothill Blvd. On 5/25/2024, we could hear loud music and a lot of yelling at around 2 p.m. It continued to get louder over the course of an hour, and we found it was coming from a fraternity a few blocks away at 1237 Foothill. We called SLOPD and were told that the party had already been issued a noise citation and SLOPD would go back to the party location. Two hours later, the thumping music and screaming could still be heard from our home. We went over to see if it was the same party, and it was. There were police officers sitting in two SLOPD units parked on Kentucky Ave , facing toward Hathway. People were climbing over the fence from Hathway to reach the backyard of 1237 Foothill. One officer said the fraternity had already been issued two noise citations, but the fraternity refused to stop the party! The officer had called his sergeant to respond so they could figure out what to do. We endured hours of thumping music and screaming from the fraternity party three blocks away from our home. 5 It has become more common for a fraternity to continue their loud party even after they’ve been issued a citation for a noise violation. Sometimes the party increases in size and volume and SLOPD is called again. The day after the party described above, on 5/26/2024, there was another large fraternity party at 1841 Slack for Zeta Beta Tau. The SLOPD dispatch log shows someone called SLOPD at 1:50 p.m. and a noise citation was issued with 70 people noted, but the party didn’t stop and continued to grow. At 2:30 p.m. another call was made to SLOPD issued another citation and noted 100+ people. Someone else called SLOPD from Hays & Graves, a block away, to report a large party heard in the area. After Zeta Beta Tau ended the party on Slack, they had a loud party at another of their documented satellite fraternity houses on Albert and received another noise citation. One does not expect a standard party to consist of 50-100+ loud, intoxicated people with blaring music heard blocks away, day and night, even in an R-4 zone, but that describes a standard fraternity party. There are also constant drinking games, yelling, chanting and profanity throughout the weekend, increased car and foot and traffic, to and from the fraternity parties, and intoxicated people screaming as they pass by. There is no escape if you live nearby. The only way to have any order is to set out detailed conditions in the CUP, that address the hours of operation and noise impacts in a meaningful way, and to enforce the CUP. I have attached a 2-minute video with series of videos in the past few weeks including:  A short clip of the Theta Chi party at 1237 Foothill on 5/25/2024, taken from a block away in an R-1 zone.  The video that was posted by Theta Chi fraternity beforehand, advertising the party that took place at 1237 Foothill on Saturday 5/25/2024.  The video that was posted by a Zeta Beta Chi fraternity advertising a party that took place at 1841 Slack on Sunday 5/26/2024.  The video posted by a Phi Sigma Kappa fraternity advertising a party beforehand that took place at 348 Hathway on 5/18/2024.  Video taken of the party at 348 Hathway on 5/18/2024. If the attachment doesn’t work here’s a link: https://vimeo.com/955676812?share=copy We have dozens of videos and, unfortunately, have become increasingly frustrated over the past two years due to lack of action by the City. I’ve attached video with some snippets from various fraternity parties for one fraternity house so you can get an idea of the noise impact from a fraternity house. Link: https://vimeo.com/955760836?share=copy People who live in our neighborhood can’t get away from the constant noise and disruptions that are specifically from fraternity houses in our neighborhood unless we leave our home. And when a party is at night and keeps us awake, we must get out of bed, get dressed, and go find the party to get an address to call SLOPD. There needs to be conditions added to Lambda Chi Alpha’s CUP to better define the fraternity operation, so everything is clear from the beginning, for the benefit of the fraternity and the impacted neighborhood. FOUR STRIKES The CUP should include a condition that outlines a threshold for noise violations, which triggers a review of the CUP. For example, “If four noise citations are issued to the property within 12 months - including a cumulative total of all addresses within the same parcel - the conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission may add, delete or modify the conditions of approval or may revoke the use permit.” Condition 3 of the proposed CUP says the CUP “shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the City receives substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Department or Police Department employee, which contains information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a violation of this Conditional Use Permit, or of City Ordinances, regulations, or Police Department resources (e.g., calls for service) applicable to the fraternity use has occurred.” 6 1. One complaint should satisfy this condition, instead of multiple complaints, so that word should be changed from “complaints” to “complaint” in condition 3. 2. It is highly unlikely that the city will write a complaint. The city has not been proactive whatsoever about regulating fraternity operations for at least a decade, when it was documented that there were illegal fraternity houses on Hathway, after a roof collapsed during St. Fratty’s Day. In my report given to Ms. Tway and Mr. Mezzapesa, I pointed out the ongoing violations of the existing CUPs at fraternity houses, but the city did not take any action against the CUPs. For example, Alpha Gamma Rho has been suspended by Cal Poly for two years and is not in good standing, which is automatic grounds for revoking their CUP, but when last I heard, their CUP was not revoked. 3. Residents are reluctant to come forward to file a written complaint and risk being targeted by the fraternity. Several of my affected neighbors have expressed fear about that. Some have contacted Mr. Mezzapesa but will not file a written complaint because they are afraid of retaliation. 4. My husband and I finally made a written complaint against a fraternity CUP in early February based on ongoing violations, including six noise citations / two unruly gatherings in 10 months. No action has been taken by the city. It’s been over four months since the complaint was filed, and the fraternity has received more noise complaints and has been issued at least four more noise citations since then. It makes more sense to have a certain number of strikes (citations) outlined in the conditions, and when that is surpassed, the CUP shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. A WRITTEN COMPLAINT REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN SPECIFIED TIME If a substantiated written complaint is received, the CUP should set forth a timeline for referral to the Planning Commission, for example, within 30 days. LIVE BANDS, DJs, and AMPLIFIED MUSIC Chapter 9.3 of the SLOMC defines the prohibition of unruly gatherings (URG). Unpermitted live bands, DJs and amplified music fall under the URG definition (Section 9.13.020 E) yet are extremely common at a fraternity house. Unfortunately, SLOPD does not often cite live bands, amplified music, and/or DJs as unruly gatherings. Also, Community Development enforces the terms of the CUP and SLOPD does not. The CUP should include a condition that prohibits unpermitted live bands, DJs and amplified music. Although it is already recognized in the SLOMC, other provisions of the SLOMC are listed as conditions of the CUP, and are also covered by the SLOMC, such as the loss of the CUP if the fraternity loses its standing which is specified under SLOMC (17.86.130 A.3). Listing unpermitted bands, etc. as a condition will underscore the importance especially as it pertains to a fraternity house, as this law is commonly violated. If they don’t plan to have unpermitted live bands, DJs and amplified music, then they should not object to having this condition in their CUP. CUMULATIVE CITATIONS FOR FRATERNITY OPERATIONS ON SAME PARCEL Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 052-071-030 includes all the addresses in this application for the CUP. If a noise citation is issued to the fraternity, regardless of whether it is for any one of the listed six addresses on the parcel, the citation should accumulate against the APN, not each separate address. The fine for a noise citation increases for each citation written as follows: 1st noise citation, $350, second noise citation, $700, third and subsequent noise citation, $1,000. After nine months without a citation, the fine reverts to $350. When there are multiple addresses on the same parcel, each address is treated separately, so their first citation is $350 for each address. This is because there is a presumption that unrelated groups of people reside at each separate addresses, so it would not be fair to hold one group responsible for the other group’s behavior. However, Lambda Chi Alpha is applying for a CUP as a single entity / fraternity to occupy all addresses on the parcel. Therefore, the fraternity should be held responsible for noise citations cumulatively for the same parcel. 7 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Most CUPs for other fraternities include a “neighborhood relations plan” with annual training. At the very least, the fraternity should be made aware of the terms of their CUP every Fall so they understand their responsibilities. NOISE HISTORY OF LAMBDA CHI ALPHA AT THIS LOCATION Since Lambda Chi Alpha has been operating at 1264 Foothill, there have been numerous calls to SLOPD for noisy parties. The fraternity was issued a noise citation at 3:45 a.m. on St. Fratty’s Day, 3/16/2024. Prior to St. Fratty’s Day, in anticipation of the potential for early morning disruptions in the neighborhood, city representatives met with Greek life leaders at Cal Poly and specifically warned them about their participation in St. Fratty’s Day. SLOPD also did not allow fraternities to register parties on 3/16/2024, St. Fratty’s Day. Still, Lambda Chi Alpha received two noise citations at this property early that morning. One week earlier, on 3/10/2023, the fraternity held an event called “SLO Jam” with multiple unpermitted live bands on the property, which is against the law in all residential neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo. The fraternity originally planned to hold the event at a satellite house on Albert Drive, but code enforcement told them and the property owner that live bands are not allowed in any residential neighborhood, and they would receive a code violation if they held the event. Instead of canceling the event, the fraternity moved it to 1264 Foothill and held the event anyway with several unpermitted live bands. Less than five months earlier, on 10/27/2023 at around 10 p.m. my husband and I witnessed hundreds of people in Halloween costumes streaming out of the house and yard at 1264 Foothill Blvd. SLOPD had blocked off a lane of traffic on Foothill Blvd to clear out an out-of-control party at the fraternity house and there were many officers, including bicycle officers, on scene, escorting people off of the property. On 7/14/2023 at 12:30 a.m. the property at 1264 Foothill was cited for a noise violation, and a month earlier, on 6/17/2023 at 11:23 p.m., they received another noise violation. The property at 1241 Monte Vista was issued a noise violation on 2/3/2023 at 10:11 p.m. and had multiple other noise complaints since Fall 2022. 1243 Monte Vista received a citation on 12/2/2023. 1249 Monte Vista had a report filed by SLOPD for a noisy party on 11/15/2022. 1251 Monte Vista had noise violations on 12/3/2022, 12/8/2023, and another on 3/16/2024 at 3:30 a.m., St. Fratty’s Day. This is not a quiet property. The neighbors are negatively impacted by the noise and other fraternity activity. To put this in perspective, most addresses in our neighborhood don’t have a single noise violation but most of the fraternity houses have had multiple noise violations. Please don’t normalize the disruption of a fraternity house just because it’s near campus, because it’s also near our lower-density residential neighborhood. The CUP should address and mitigate the impacts of the fraternity operation, consistent with the CUPs for other Cal Poly fraternities, to ensure that the fraternity members understand the responsibilities toward their neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration and time. Best Regards, Kathie Walker 168 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Saturday, October 12, 2024 9:31 PM To:Steven Walker Subject:RE: 6.b. Appeal for a Fraternity CUP at 1264 Foothill Hi Steven, Thanks for the email. As I approach deliberations on Tuesday, and keeping in mind, that the item we are reviewing only covers the particular CUP and appeal before us, are there particular items that you would like to ask about or request to be included, that are not? I just want to clarify since you talk about a lot of history here. It’s all relevant for context, but going forward with this CUP/fraternity maybe you could give me your top three biggest “wish list items” from your email below, that you feel are not addressed in the current CUP. I see from the staff report and supporting documents that some of the items brought of at Planning Commission have been included in the revised version coming to council. Thank you, Michelle From: Steven Walker < Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2024 2:56 PM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: 6.b. Appeal for a Fraternity CUP at 1264 Foothill This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Mayor Stewart and Councilmembers, I must respond to the City staff’s report, beginning with Appeal Issue Number 4. City staff says that setting a threshold of violations within a certain timeframe that triggers a review of the CUP by the Planning Commission somehow prohibits staff from referring the CUP to the Planning Condition for re-review upon receipt of any substantiated violation or frequency of violations. I’ve read the appeal, and nothing is suggested to prevent staff from referring the CUP to the Planning Commission at any time if a provision is added for a threshold of violations that trigger a review. It could be two violations in six 169 months or four violations in twelve months. These are not permissive or excusable but require some form of action when the threshold of violations is met. It makes the condition more effective. Here are the historical facts: 1. Every fraternity CUP currently has multiple documented violations of its conditions. 2. Despite these multiple violations, city staff, including those listed in Condition 3 (Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Department, or Police Department) have never written a complaint against a CUP for re-review by the Planning Commission. It seems the responsibility for writing a complaint is left to the residents, if you leave the condition as it is, without a trigger for review. 3. Many residents are afraid to file a written complaint because of potential retaliation from fraternity members. This is a realistic fear because several residents have had their property vandalized or faced other repercussions when fraternity members suspected their neighbor called SLOPD to report a noisy party. One neighbor had their car vandalized and others have been cussed out by fraternity members after noise citations were issued to fraternities near their homes. An unofficial fraternity house for Sigma Pi moved in next door to our family and members began cyberstalking my wife 24 hours after they received a noise citation for a noisy party, and I was away at work. Among other things, they posted ads on Craigslist advertising “free” items at our house and made appointments for people to come to our home. For months afterward, they incessantly teased and harassed our dog, yelled “F#ck you!” toward our home randomly, day and night from a side deck adjacent to our bedrooms and kitchen, banged on trash bins filled with empty bottles for several minutes in the middle of the night after moving them close to our bedroom windows, and can be heard admitting it was done to harass us. We have the video. Our property was also vandalized. Nearly a year after the fraternity members moved out, someone related to the fraternity trespassed onto our property, walked up to our bedroom window, called out my wife’s name, then walked away. Afterward, they are seen and heard on our video surveillance saying they “are friends with the Sigma Pi guys who lived here last year.” Our home address was repeatedly posted on social media, for example, advertising a party at 5 a.m. on St. Fratty’s Day at our address. There are too many incidents to list and the harassment has continued, even though the fraternity members moved out in June 2023. The repercussions experienced by our family and our neighbors were based on suspicions by fraternity members because of the fraternity's proximity to their neighbors. There was no way for the fraternity members to know positively that we, or our neighbors, called SLOPD but their suspicions drove them to take these actions. For these reasons, it is not reasonable to rely on a written complaint by a resident against a fraternity’s CUP. 4. I wrote a complaint for repeated violations of a fraternity’s CUP, and no action was taken. A fraternity with a CUP is located a block from my home, at the end of my street. There are constant noisy parties with hundreds of guests at the fraternity. My wife and I have spoken to the fraternity members several times during noisy parties. In the nine months between 3/18/2023 and 12/3/2023, SLOPD issued six noise citations to the fraternity, including two unruly gatherings with hundreds of people. On 2/5/2024, I submitted a written complaint to Community Development Director, Timmi Tway. It has been over eight months, and the written complaint has not been forwarded to the Planning Commission. (!!!) Community Development did not contact the fraternity about the complaint filed on 2/5/2024 and the fraternity continued to have large, noisy parties. Between 2/10/2024 and 6/8/2024, SLOPD issued five more noise citations to the fraternity, some with 100 people. We filed another written complaint on 6/3/2024 citing four additional citations since the previous written complaint made on 2/5/2024. Neither written complaint has been forwarded to the Planning Commission. Within that time frame, several Planning Commission meetings were canceled because there was nothing on their agenda. Community Development should have taken care of the matter soon after the first written complaint was filed on 2/5/2024. We contacted Community Development multiple times because of the ongoing, noisy parties at the fraternity after we filed our written complaint. The city’s code enforcement supervisor, John Mezzapesa, said that the written 170 complaint was given to Tyler Corey to handle, and he was working on it, but Mr. Corey didn’t do anything. It’s been over 8 months, and the Planning Commission has still not received my complaint(s). Let's be honest. It is not realistic to believe that Community Development will be proactive in filing a complaint and refer a fraternity to the Planning Commission for re-review, especially after one violation, as they suggest in their response. An existing CUP for a fraternity says that any written complaint will be forwarded to the Planning Commission within one week of receipt. In addition to adding a threshold for violations, I feel it is important to have a deadline in Condition 3 for forwarding a complaint to the Planning Commission after it is received. During the Planning Commission hearing on 6/12/2024, Commissioner Kahn suggested a threshold of four violations within 12 months as a trigger for review. As the city staff was drafting new conditions, Commissioner Kahn again emphasized adding that condition, and staff told him that it was already covered by Condition 3. However, there is a distinct difference between requiring a written complaint and having a threshold of violations to trigger a review of the CUP. Setting a threshold of violations of the CUP within a specified timeframe guarantees there will be a review at some point if the fraternity reaches that threshold. It does not require a written complaint from a resident, though a resident may still write a complaint. But as I’ve described, many affected residents do not feel comfortable doing so. It does not rely on Code Enforcement, Fire, or SLOPD to file a complaint, though they may still do so. But City Staff has not asked for a review of any fraternity’s CUP even though every fraternity CUP has had multiple ongoing violations for several years. It does not prevent staff from asking for a review sooner, after one violation, if they choose to do so. But realistically they will not do so considering fraternities have many ongoing violations of their CUPs and no review has ever been requested by city staff. A condition with a threshold of violations that trigger a review by the Planning Commission should be added to the CUP. It protects the health, safety, and well-being of the neighborhood and holds the fraternity responsible for the conditions of their CUP. Adding Conditions to the CUP to Make Things More Clear to the Fraternity: In response to Appeal Issue No. 1, where the appeal asks for specific conditions related to realistic problems of a fraternity use in a residential neighborhood that are listed in other fraternity CUPs, staff says that adding conditions to the CUP is not necessary because the SLOMC has had “incremental improvements” between 1983 and 2013 that directly address concerns related to noise, etc. The “improvements” include updating unrelated things like adding days to the safety enhancement zone or updating fine amounts for citations. It seems disingenuous to imply that these changes justify omitting useful conditions that are included in other fraternity CUPs. Those conditions strengthen the CUP and help to clarify the conditions to the fraternity. When the other CUPs were drafted, the city also had a noise ordinance, residential occupancy requirements, etc. but the Planning Commission included certain conditions to emphasize the fraternity’s obligation to follow the noise ordinance and other laws. These added conditions outline the fraternity’s responsibility to the neighborhood and the consequences for violation of the CUP. Spelling out these specific conditions is beneficial because they clarify common issues related to a fraternity’s use, especially related to its location in a residential neighborhood. When the conditions are documented in a CUP it is less likely that there will be confusion by the fraternity about relevant laws and conditions. I brought up this issue during public comment at the Planning Commission hearing and the commissioners agreed that specifically mentioning the noise ordinance and “quiet hours” is important, even though it’s already in the city’s noise ordinance. It would also be helpful if the Community Development Department met with each fraternity at the beginning of the academic year to review the conditions in the CUPs so there is a clear understanding of the specific conditions. 171 Special Event Permits and Violation of the City’s Noise Ordinance : In response to Appeal Issue No. 2, staff says the municipal code allows the noise control officer to grant exceptions for the fraternity to violate the noise ordinance if deemed appropriate. I don’t understand how it can ever be deemed appropriate for a fraternity to violate the noise ordinance. This is a residential neighborhood. The noise ordinance ensures that every residential neighborhood is protected from unhealthy levels of noise and allows people to rest when needed. It doesn’t make sense that there is a carve-out for a fraternity to violate the law with what the staff’s report refers to as “amplified noise-generating activity”. It is harmful to even suggest a condition that grants an exception of the law to fraternities so they can have a party or multiple parties each year in a residential neighborhood. My work schedule includes long shifts, ranging from 12.5 to 14 hours, and switches between days and nights. I also work on weekends. I depend on a quiet environment at home to sleep between my shifts. As an EMS pilot, it would be unsafe for me to work if I am not rested. It’s unbelievable to imagine that the city would allow noisy parties that would potentially disturb its neighbors and interrupt our ability to sleep. The fraternity brings in a lot of money from its members and can afford to hold larger, amplified, noisy events at a third-party venue. Cal Poly should explore the possibility of providing a venue for their Greek life organizations to hold events on campus. I’ve attended several events on campus at various facilities and they were well done, with catering and other amenities. Cal Poly needs to start taking more responsibility for its fraternities. Cal Poly has recently recruited four more fraternity chapters to its campus without housing provisions for the location of their fraternity houses. Each of those new fraternity chapters is illegally located in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods and hosts fraternity events. Still, Cal Poly continues to recruit even more fraternity chapters to its campus and the impact of fraternity activities on our neighborhoods continues to increase. There are now 19 fraternities in the IFC and only 6 have CUPs. This CUP is setting a precedent for other fraternity CUPs and there should NOT be a condition that allows fraternity parties to violate the noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood under any circumstances. Cal Poly has only been in session for a month and Lambda Chi Alpha at 1264 Foothill has already had several noise complaints and two noise citations in the past two weeks for noisy parties after 10 p.m. One of the noise citations says there were 70 people at the fraternity party. The CUP for 1264 Foothill says that occupancy is limited to 48 people unless they have a special event permit. The fraternity doesn't seem to care about the conditions in its CUP or their impact on the neighborhood. A month ago, the police log described a party in the front yard with a sign that said, "You honk, We drink". That party wasn't cited. Considering the documented issues related to fraternities in general, for the protection of the neighborhood and surrounding neighbors, and considering the fraternities’ lack of understanding of the current conditions of their CUPs and laws, I respectfully request that you uphold the appeal and add conditions to the fraternity’s CUP to make it more effective and clear for the fraternity. It also sets a precedent for future CUPs so it’s important to get it right. Thank you. Sincerely, Steve Walker 172 From:Sandra Rowley < Sent:Saturday, October 12, 2024 9:18 PM To:McDonald, Whitney; Dietrick, Christine Subject:Reference Staff Response This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Whitney and Christine, I am looking for a specific citation in the California Constitution or elsewhere that supports the following comments in the Staff Report, REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A FRATERNITY (USE-0331-2023, APPL-0365-2024), specifically as it refers to the Staff Response on pages 518 and 519 of the staff report, which state as follows: People in private residences (e.g., residents of the fraternity) are legally allowed to gather and meet with guests without government interference into their private residences, relationships, and associations, provided that the number and conduct of those residents and guests conform to applicable regulations. Due to constitutional concerns with placing a condition that limits the type of people in private residences ( i.e., residents vs. nonresidents), Condition No. 14 was written to directly address noise concerns by identifying an extended range of hours between 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. for regular compliance with a lower exterior noise limit. Due to constitutional concerns regarding government interference into private residences, relationships, and associations, staff does not recommend adding or revising a condition to limit the type of people in private residences. This appeal issue is addressed through incorporation of Condition No. 14 as well as requirements and enforcement actions detailed in Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control), Chapter 9.13 (Unruly Gatherings), and Chapter 9.22 (Safety Enhancement Zones). It would also be helpful to know 1) the context in which "government interference" is used; 2) if "type" refers to race, sex, color, creed, ethnicity, or national origin rather than a general term like non-resident; and 3) if "into their private residence" includes the outside areas. The only information I have been able to find in the California Constitution that involves the right for people to assemble, was in Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 3a where it says "The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition government for redress of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good." Thank you so much for your assistance! Sandy Rowley 173 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Saturday, October 12, 2024 8:01 PM To:Sandra Rowley Subject:RE: SUBJECT: Item 6b, Review of an Appeal Regarding a Fraternity Conditional Use Permit Hi Sandra, Thanks for the email. I read all the materials and have several questions for staff on Tuesday night based on some of the statements you made and questions you asked. I will certainly ask those Tuesday night and take them into consideration during our deliberations. Thank you again for writing in. Michelle From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2024 11:41 AM To: Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Cc: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: SUBJECT: Item 6b, Review of an Appeal Regarding a Fraternity Conditional Use Permit This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, First of all, RQN appreciates that Lamda Chi Alpha applied for this Conditional Use Permit - an action many other fraternities have not taken. Please keep in mind during your review and deliberation that Lamda Chi Alpha is first of all a residence that is located in a neighborhood. The area in which it is located contains seniors, families, and children as well as college students. It is not adjacent to or part of the downtown which comes alive from before 8 a.m. until after 2 a.m., nor is it in an identified entertainment zone. The staff report implies that the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is different from previous fraternity CUP’s because they were issued several years ago. However, we contend that it is different because it was based on more recent CUP’s that were issued to two sororities, Delta Gamma and Alpha Omicron Pi. Sororities vs Fraternities Why should fraternity CUP’s be different from sorority CUP’s? The National Panhellenic Conference requires sororities to hold alcohol-free events and prohibits Panhellenic funds from being used to buy alcohol. Fraternities do not have this restriction. As a result, sororities hold many events at fraternities or at third-party venues; thus, events held at sorority houses are not as disruptive as those held at fraternity houses and do not need the added conditions. For example, during the 2023-2024 academic year six (6) fraternities had 37 noise complaints while nine (9) sororities had 2 noise complaints. By the way, there is no reason that fraternities cannot also host parties and other large gatherings at third-party venues; fraternities at other CSU’s do this. The changes made to Noise Control (updating fine amounts), Unruly Gatherings (clarifying components) and the Safety Enhancement Zones (adding holidays) do not compensate for the conditions placed in other fraternity CUP’s that were omitted from this one. Those conditions should be restored. Additionally, five of six CUP’s currently in effect, including the previous one for Lamda Chi Alpha, restrict the number of persons allowed on the site between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. The new Resolution, No. PC-1085-24, allows a maximum 48 people at routine meetings and gatherings. However, no time of day is specified, thus allowing 48 174 people to be on-site between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. Forty-eight people gathering outside during nocturnal hours can, and often do, make a considerable amount of noise, and this is a residential neighborhood. The Current Condition 14 states: The fraternity use shall comply with Table 1 (Exterior Noise Limits) of Section 9. 12. 060 (Exterior Noise Limits) between the extended hours of 10: 00 pm and 9:00 am, except as approved in writing as a special event by the Community Development Director. This allows 48 people on-site during the extended hours without a special event permit. In this part of town, especially at this time of night, adherence to the noise ordinance is critical. MC 17.86.130 B.1., Required Findings, Fraternities and Sororities, states: “As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities, provide adequate parking, and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties. The project will be compatible with site constraints and the character of the neighborhood.” (emphasis added) 1. Replace Condition 14 to read: “No meetings or other gatherings involving persons other than the 24 fraternity members living on the site are allowed between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 a.m., except as approved in writing as a special event by the Community Development Director.” Current Condition 16 states: Live entertainment, bands, and/or amplified sounds are prohibited, unless otherwise approved through a special event by the Community Development Department. However, MC 9.12.040 General noise regulations states: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, and in addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully or negligently make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, or permit or allow to be made or continued any noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes any discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity in the area. No permit shall be issued for any activity that may violate this section.” (emphasis added) Amplified music from bands or DJ's can be disturbing not only to neighbors nearby, but also to those living several streets away from the site where it is occurring, and it definitely disturbs the peace and quiet of a neighborhood. 2. Replace Condition 16 to read: “No events involving the use of amplified sound equipment shall be allowed.” Authority and Duties of the Noise Control Office(r) (NCO): MC 9.12.30 states: “The noise control program established by this chapter shall be administered by the community development department (administration/special exceptions of time periods greater than forty-eight hours/ zoning enforcement) and the police department (noise violation enforcement/special exceptions of time periods less than forty-eight hours).” (emphasis added) It is unclear to whom one would go for the Special Event Permit. Initially to the Community Development Director who then provides it to the Police Chief for action or to the Police Chief who then coordinates with the Community Development Director? Limitation on Gatherings: We are confused about the discussion in the staff report since MC 17.86.130 specifies a Required Finding that conditions have been included that place limits on the number of persons allowed on site, restrict activities, provide adequate parking and limit potential disturbances to neighboring properties. In addition, other fraternity CUP’s contain the same or similarly worded restrictions. (emphasis added) Threshold: Reference Condition 3 to provide a threshold to automatically trigger Planning Commission review. Why is an automatic threshold needed? Two written complaints have been sent to the Community Development Department concerning the same fraternity, one in February 2024 (6 noise violations/unruly gatherings in 10 months) and one in June 2024 (included an additional 5 complaints, some with 100 people). Thus far no Planning Commission meeting has included review of the fraternity’s CUP. The Planning Commission suggested a “four strikes” threshold within 12 months, whereby the CUP would 175 automatically be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the fraternity received four violations of the City’s noise ordinance or property maintenance regulations within 12 months. > The previous CUP for 1264 E. Foothill included an equivalent provision in Condition 10: “Use permit shall be reviewed if the City receives any reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints, or if two convictions are received for violations of the City's noise or property maintenance regulations within a six-month period. It also stated: In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the use permit. The Planning Commission may consider adding a condition requiring fraternity officers to perform a community service project in the neighborhood.” > The new CUP revised that condition, now Condition 3, to state: “The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if the City receives substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Department or Police Department employee, which contains information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a violation of this Conditional Use Permit, or of City Ordinances, regulations, or Police Department resources ( e. g., calls for service) applicable to the fraternity use has occurred. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, the conditions of approval may be added, modified, and/or removed, or the Conditional Use Permit may be revoked.” This new CUP places the burden of writing up a complaint on City staff as well as on residents. Code Enforcement (the Community Development Department) knows, and has documentation, of violations of property maintenance standards and the outcome, and the Police Log shows when there has been a DAC or citation issued to a fraternity and the Police Department knows if it was or was not successfully appealed. These “proofs” can be used in lieu of written complaints and, hopefully, be referred to the Planning Commission in a timely fashion if a threshold of violations is established to trigger review. Written complaints could still be accepted, just not be the only form of input required. Recommend revising Condition 3 to read: 3. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if and when the fraternity receives four violations of the City’s noise ordinance, or four property maintenance violations, or a combination of the two equaling four violations within 12 months. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission may consider adding a condition requiring fraternity officers to perform one or more community service projects in the neighborhood. Accumulation of Violations against the Parcel The Planning Commission suggested that violations should accumulate against the parcel instead of against each of the six individual addresses since it is one parcel, one CUP and the property is occupied exclusively by the fraternity. This was also suggested in written and oral comments. However, this condition was not included. The Staff Report is correct that the Conditional Use Permit regulates activities for the entire parcel – as it relates to property maintenance violations. This is not just because of the CUP, but also because the Community Development Department also deals with a property using their APN. However, the Police Department addresses noise violations by street name and number. For example, this property, which was subject to a CUP from 2001-2021, received noise citations at 1264 and 1264 ½ Foothill separately; therefore, the citation fines were not cumulative against the property. With six addresses and two streets as part of this parcel it is conceivable that separate addresses could all be issued “first citations” for noise ($350) instead of subsequent ones that carry a higher penalty without them ever being attributed to the parcel as a whole. That was the rationale for requesting a condition be added to attribute noise violations for any of these addresses to the main house at 1264 East Foothill. We believe a condition so stating is consistent with holding the fraternity collectively responsible for their activities. Recommend a new condition: 4. All dwellings on the property, regardless of street address, shall be considered as Lamda Chi Alpha. Any violation of the Municipal Code (or, if preferred, Any violation of the noise ordinance), regardless of the dwelling unit where it occurred, shall be considered a violation by the fraternity and assigned to the main house at 1264 East Foothill and/or this CUP. Compliance with Conditions and with Federal, State, and Local Law 176 This “catch-all” condition is included in most of the existing CUP’s, including the previous one for Lamda Chi Alpha; it reinforces the conditions, the law, and the potential affect of the fraternity’s actions on people in the surrounding area. Recommend new condition: 5. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions or code requirements, or the conduct of the use so as to constitute a violation of Federal, State or local law, or so as to constitute a public nuisance, or so as to cause adverse impacts on the health, safety or welfare of persons in the vicinity of this use is prohibited and may constitute grounds for the revocation of this permit. Last thoughts Land Use Element Policy 2.1, Neighborhood Focus: “The City shall preserve, protect and enhance the City’s neighborhoods and strive to preserve and enhance their identity and promote a higher quality of life within each neighborhood.” Since the CUP goes with the land we wanted to look to the future as well as the present. As the most recent fraternity CUP, we think this could be used as a template for future fraternity CUP’s. Today it’s about the quality of life for everyone living or working in the Alta Vista Neighborhood. Tomorrow it may also include Neighborhoods North of Foothill or other city neighborhoods. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Rowley 189 From:Linda White < Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 10:06 PM To:CityClerk Subject:Foothill Fraternity This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Many years ago I gave up on being involved in city council affairs because I realized that the city council members had already decided what they wanted before they heard public input. Decisions were made to appease the Cal Poly and business communities. I am writing today to express my support for the dwindling number of permanent residents in San Luis Obispo. The fraternity on Foothill Boulevard should not receive an exemption to the City Noise Ordinance. The ordinance is there to preserve what little peace and comfort we can still enjoy in what has become Isla Vista North. Linda White SLO Sent from my iPad 197 From:Scott, Rick Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 3:41 PM To:Amoroso, Brian Subject:FW: cc - Walker (Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities) Attachments:Violations posted on Ask SLO app for illegal fraternity events.pdf FYI only… Thank you, Rick From: Wilbanks, Megan <mwilbanks@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 2:44 PM To: kathie walker < Cc: Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: cc - Walker (Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities) Kathie Walker, Thank you for taking the time to contact the City Council on this issue. The City Council has received your concerns and, as you included most of the appropriate staff in your correspondence, I’m adding Police Chief Rick Scott to make him aware of your concerns as well. Staff will be following up with you within two business days. BCC: Council All City Clerk’s Office City Administration City Clerk's Office 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 From: kathie walker < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:42 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: Carolyn Smith < ; Brett Cross < ; Karen Adler < ; Stewjenkins Info < ; Sandra Rowley < ; Steven Walker < ; Mila Vujovich-LaBarre < Subject: Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities not cited 198 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. City Leaders and Elected Representatives, Our family is desperate to get the illegal fraternities out of our neighborhood and I have been submitting fraternity rush events to the AskSLO app for code enforcement. People living in Monterey Heights and the S. Tassajara/Ramona neighborhoods have also reached out about illegal fraternities that are detrimentally affecting their lives. Last year there were over 60 documented illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhoods. This year there are more, as the problem is growing and spreading into other neighborhoods. It needs to be solved! Several days before Cal Poly's first weekend of fraternity rush (10/4 -10/6) I submitted to AskSLO (code enforcement) some rush events posted on social media. Cal Poly Greek life advised its fraternities not to post their addresses on social media despite each fraternity posting them on Instagram in previous years. Only a few out of 19 fraternities in the Interfraternity Council posted the addresses of their rush events on for Fall 2024. Cal Poly changed their rush policy this year and required potential new members to submit their information to Cal Poly's Greek Life office before the potential new members were personally provided with the addresses of the fraternities' events. I documented each fraternity rush event with video and/or photos as they were happening. Several fraternities also posted the events on their Instagram stories with the address or time, which correspond to each of their Instagram posts about the date, time, and address of the events. Unfortunately, most of my submissions to AskSLO were not cited. Code enforcement claims they "did not find any evidence that the property is being used as an illegal fraternity." I'm not sure how these events were overlooked because there were obvious fraternity rush parties at every one of the addresses reported at the exact date and time that I submitted to the City via AskSLO . How were these fraternity events missed when there were crowds of guys and large signs with Greek letters? If code enforcement staff was unable to confirm the rush events listed because of they don't work weekends, could the city have SLOPD verify them? Somehow, code enforcement needs to be able to document these illegal fraternity events that happen every weekend during the academic year so there needs to be a better system since these were not cited when they were blatantly obvious to any observer. Additionally, I was able to identify and document many other rush events at illegal fraternity houses during the weekend including the addresses listed at the bottom of this email. Most have been operating as illegal fraternity houses for a long time, and many are the main chapter houses for their fraternity in R-1 and R-2 residential neighborhoods, where they are not allowed. Since I know the specific addresses historically tied to each fraternity, the events weren't difficult to find because each fraternity posted its schedules with the date and time of each event. I knew the addresses from the previous years of their fraternity operations so it was simple to check those locations during the times listed on their rush schedule. The events also had crowds and Greek signage/booths in front of their houses. I've attached documentation to show that the fraternities I submitted to Ask SLO hosted rush events at illegal fraternity houses. Please use this information to reconsider the violations I previously submitted to code enforcement via Ask SLO. If you need the videos, I will provide them. I will follow up with more documentation for rush events at the other addresses listed below that have not yet been submitted to AskSLO. 199 This weekend is the final weekend of rush (10/11 - 10/13) and Monday (10/14) is "bid night" so there will be LARGE parties at all the fraternities. Then it will be a free-for-all every weekend until winter break, and start again from the new year until summer. The addresses of events that held rush events are below and SLOPD should be aware that these properties are operating as illegal fraternity houses. Each of the properties will likely hold events this weekend. The "main chapter houses" will probably host their bid night events on Monday, 10/14/2024. Please let SLOPD know so they can respond instead of sending SNAP. 1684 Mill Street (Delta Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 281 Albert Drive (Delta Upsilon) 248-250 Grand Ave (Theta Chi) 281 Hathway Ave (Kappa Sigma) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 348 Hathway Ave (Phi Kappa Psi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1525 Slack St (Sigma Pi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 2090 Hays (Sigma Epsilon) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1218 Bond St (Alpha Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1229 Fredericks (Phi Gamma Delta aka FIJI) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 654 Graves (Zeta Beta Tau) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 299 Albert (Alpha Sigma Pi) 12 Hathway (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1841 Slack St (Sigma Nu) 66 Rafael (Pi Kappa Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE IN THE CITY 1820 Hope (Theta Chi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 322 Hathway (Kappa Sigma) 1908 Loomis (Phi Sigma Kappa) 1276 Bond St (Phi Kappa Psi) 237 Albert Dr (Phi Kappa Psi) 124 Stenner (Sigma Pi) 171 Orange (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1646 Fredericks St (Zeta Beta Tau) 1868 Loomis (Delta Upsilon) 260 Chaplin (Phi Delta Theta) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1632 Fredericks (Sigma Nu) 255 Chaplin (Alpha Sigma Phi) Sincerely, -Kathie Walker Event posted on Instagram for rush event Phi Sigma Kappa Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at1908 Loomis rush event 10/5/2024 at 6 p.m. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event also posted Phi Sigma Kappa’s Instagram story promoting their rush event at 1908 Loomis from 6-10 pm (photo taken in backyard of Phi Sigma Kappa’s main Fraternity house at 348 Hathway Ave) Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Sigma Nu at 1841 Slack St Saturday Oct 5, 2 – 6 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at Sigma Nu event, 1841 Slack 10/5/2024 at 3 p.m. The signage was still set up on Sunday afternoon, Oct 6, 2024 Sigma Nu’s Instagram also identifies fraternity members living in that “established house”. The SLOMC defines a fraternity as a house where fraternity members live that holds events. The post, below, was made on 10/1/2024 Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at Phi Kappa Psi’s event, 1276 Bond St, 10/5/2024, 6 p.m. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm 1276 Bond St Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi at 237 Albert Sunday Oct 6, 10 am – 2 pm Photo of event in progress. Phi Kappa Psi posted rush event at 237 Albert Dr, 10/6/2024 on their Instagram story NOTE: 237 Albert has been an illegal fraternity house for several years. Documentation shows ongoing fraternity events at this address. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush events for Delta Sigma Phi at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St Friday Oct 4, 3-5 pm and Sunday 10/6, 6-10 pm Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Delta Sigma Phi’s Instagram stories for rush event on Friday 10/4/2024 at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St (Friday Oct 4, 3-5 pm) Event posted on Delta Sigma Phi’s Instagram stories for rush event on Sunday 10/6/2024 at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St (Sunday Oct 6, 6-10 pm) 206 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 12:50 PM To:Purrington, Teresa Subject:Re: Fraternity Enforcement Meeting Yes i will! Thanks! From: Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 8:03:55 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Fraternity Enforcement Meeting Hi Timmi, Can you add a Teams link to this meeting so Whitney can attend virtually? Thank you, Teresa -----Original Appointment----- From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:01 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi); Tway, Timothea (Timmi); McDonald, Whitney; Scott, Rick; Dietrick, Christine Subject: Fraternity Enforcement Meeting When: Monday, October 14, 2024 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). Where: 919 Conference Room 1, Main Lobby; 919 Conference Room 1, Main Lobby 209 From:Corey, Tyler Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 10:30 AM To:Justin Cooley Subject:PC Quarterly Report Attachments:8-2024 to 10-2024 PC report.doc Hi Justin, Please see the attached quarterly PC report that I will be sending over to the City Clerk. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Tyler Corey Deputy Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E tcorey@slocity.org T 805.781.7169 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO QUARTERLY REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: October 11, 2024 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Chairs of City Advisory Bodies CC: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk FROM: Justin Cooley, Chair ON BEHALF OF: Justin Cooley (Chair), David Houghton (Vice Chair), Juan Munoz-Morris, Steve Kahn, Robert Jorgensen, Eric Tolle and Sheryl Flores. REGULAR MTG. DATE/TIME: Second and fourth Wednesday of every month at 6:00 p.m. STAFF LIAISON: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director of Community Development COUNCIL LIAISONS: Council Members Jan Marx and Michelle Shoresman MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS (AUGUST 2024 - OCTOBER 2024):  Reviewed and recommended the City Council adopt municipal code amendments to the cannabis retail delivery ordinance to allow cannabis retail storefronts to conduct retail sales by delivery with approval of a conditional use permit.  Reviewed and approved a conditional use permit for a new 2,480 square foot commercial cannabis retail storefront located at 2400 Broad Street in the retail commercial (CR-SF) zone with special focus overlay.  Reviewed and recommended the City Council abandon public right-of-way for a Cal Poly housing project located on Slack/Grand and adjust jurisdictional boundary to correct historical boundary crossings and to coincide with the new housing project. UPCOMING PROJECTS (NOVEMBER 2024 – JANUARY 2025):  Re-review of a conditional use permit for an existing fraternity use located at 280 California.  Review of a Director’s Action permit to establish a rotating overnight safe parking program at six locations throughout the City. This item is being referred to the Planning Commission based on previous Commissioner comments requesting to review the permit.  Review and recommendation to the City Council of various amendments to the Zoning Regulations to address changes in state housing law. 211 From:Francis, Emily Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 7:53 AM To:kathie walker Subject:Re: Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities not cited Kathie, Thank you for the details of the actions you took to report these parties. I know it has been a frustrating experience for you navigating the process and the daily experience of living in this area. I will be following up to get better answers on why citations were not issued in these situations and u restart how we can shift our enforcement mechanisms as well as resources. Thank you again for staying so engaged in this process. Take care, Emily Get Outlook for iOS From: kathie walker < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:41:57 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: Carolyn Smith < ; Brett Cross < ; Karen Adler < ; Stewjenkins Info < ; Sandra Rowley < ; Steven Walker < ; Mila Vujovich-LaBarre < Subject: Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities not cited This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. City Leaders and Elected Representatives, Our family is desperate to get the illegal fraternities out of our neighborhood and I have been submitting fraternity rush events to the AskSLO app for code enforcement. People living in Monterey Heights and the S. Tassajara/Ramona neighborhoods have also reached out about illegal fraternities that are detrimentally affecting their lives. Last year there were over 60 documented illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhoods. This year there are more, as the problem is growing and spreading into other neighborhoods. It needs to be solved! Several days before Cal Poly's first weekend of fraternity rush (10/4 -10/6) I submitted to AskSLO (code enforcement) some rush events posted on social media. Cal Poly Greek life advised its fraternities not to post their addresses on social media despite each fraternity posting them on Instagram in previous years. Only a few out of 19 fraternities in the Interfraternity Council posted the addresses of their rush events on for Fall 2024. Cal Poly changed their rush policy this year and required potential new members to submit their information to Cal Poly's Greek Life office before the potential new members were personally provided with the addresses of the fraternities' events. 212 I documented each fraternity rush event with video and/or photos as they were happening. Several fraternities also posted the events on their Instagram stories with the address or time, which correspond to each of their Instagram posts about the date, time, and address of the events. Unfortunately, most of my submissions to AskSLO were not cited. Code enforcement claims they "did not find any evidence that the property is being used as an illegal fraternity." I'm not sure how these events were overlooked because there were obvious fraternity rush parties at every one of the addresses reported at the exact date and time that I submitted to the City via AskSLO . How were these fraternity events missed when there were crowds of guys and large signs with Greek letters? If code enforcement staff was unable to confirm the rush events listed because of they don't work weekends, could the city have SLOPD verify them? Somehow, code enforcement needs to be able to document these illegal fraternity events that happen every weekend during the academic year so there needs to be a better system since these were not cited when they were blatantly obvious to any observer. Additionally, I was able to identify and document many other rush events at illegal fraternity houses during the weekend including the addresses listed at the bottom of this email. Most have been operating as illegal fraternity houses for a long time, and many are the main chapter houses for their fraternity in R-1 and R-2 residential neighborhoods, where they are not allowed. Since I know the specific addresses historically tied to each fraternity, the events weren't difficult to find because each fraternity posted its schedules with the date and time of each event. I knew the addresses from the previous years of their fraternity operations so it was simple to check those locations during the times listed on their rush schedule. The events also had crowds and Greek signage/booths in front of their houses. I've attached documentation to show that the fraternities I submitted to Ask SLO hosted rush events at illegal fraternity houses. Please use this information to reconsider the violations I previously submitted to code enforcement via Ask SLO. If you need the videos, I will provide them. I will follow up with more documentation for rush events at the other addresses listed below that have not yet been submitted to AskSLO. This weekend is the final weekend of rush (10/11 - 10/13) and Monday (10/14) is "bid night" so there will be LARGE parties at all the fraternities. Then it will be a free-for-all every weekend until winter break, and start again from the new year until summer. The addresses of events that held rush events are below and SLOPD should be aware that these properties are operating as illegal fraternity houses. Each of the properties will likely hold events this weekend. The "main chapter houses" will probably host their bid night events on Monday, 10/14/2024. Please let SLOPD know so they can respond instead of sending SNAP. 1684 Mill Street (Delta Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 281 Albert Drive (Delta Upsilon) 248-250 Grand Ave (Theta Chi) 281 Hathway Ave (Kappa Sigma) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 348 Hathway Ave (Phi Kappa Psi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1525 Slack St (Sigma Pi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 2090 Hays (Sigma Epsilon) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1218 Bond St (Alpha Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1229 Fredericks (Phi Gamma Delta aka FIJI) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 654 Graves (Zeta Beta Tau) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 299 Albert (Alpha Sigma Pi) 213 12 Hathway (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1841 Slack St (Sigma Nu) 66 Rafael (Pi Kappa Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE IN THE CITY 1820 Hope (Theta Chi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 322 Hathway (Kappa Sigma) 1908 Loomis (Phi Sigma Kappa) 1276 Bond St (Phi Kappa Psi) 237 Albert Dr (Phi Kappa Psi) 124 Stenner (Sigma Pi) 171 Orange (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1646 Fredericks St (Zeta Beta Tau) 1868 Loomis (Delta Upsilon) 260 Chaplin (Phi Delta Theta) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1632 Fredericks (Sigma Nu) 255 Chaplin (Alpha Sigma Phi) Sincerely, -Kathie Walker 214 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Friday, October 11, 2024 1:40 AM To:Buckley, Nick Subject:Ask SLO Request #: 8382 is 7 days past due This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Request # 8382 from the Government Outreach System is 7 days late. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Reported by: Description: Illegal fraternity event scheduled for 10/5/2024. Delta Sigma Phi advertised a "Dye Tourney and Pizza" fraternity event for rush recruitment at 589 Cuesta Drive, an R-1 zone. Fraternity operations and events are not permitted at this address. A link to the Instagram post is here: https://www.instagram.com/p/DAh8UofJuHt/ Expected Close Date: 10/04/2024 Click here to access the request 215 From:Mezzapesa, John Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2024 11:23 PM To:Buckley, Nick; Sheats, Steven; Loew, Michael Subject:Fw: Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities not cited Attachments:Violations posted on Ask SLO app for illegal fraternity events.pdf FYI From: kathie walker < Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:42 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: Carolyn Smith < ; Brett Cross < ; Karen Adler < ; Stewjenkins Info < ; Sandra Rowley < ; Steven Walker < ; Mila Vujovich-LaBarre < Subject: Ongoing violations of illegal fraternities not cited This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. City Leaders and Elected Representatives, Our family is desperate to get the illegal fraternities out of our neighborhood and I have been submitting fraternity rush events to the AskSLO app for code enforcement. People living in Monterey Heights and the S. Tassajara/Ramona neighborhoods have also reached out about illegal fraternities that are detrimentally affecting their lives. Last year there were over 60 documented illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhoods. This year there are more, as the problem is growing and spreading into other neighborhoods. It needs to be solved! Several days before Cal Poly's first weekend of fraternity rush (10/4 -10/6) I submitted to AskSLO (code enforcement) some rush events posted on social media. Cal Poly Greek life advised its fraternities not to post their addresses on social media despite each fraternity posting them on Instagram in previous years. Only a few out of 19 fraternities in the Interfraternity Council posted the addresses of their rush events on for Fall 2024. Cal Poly changed their rush policy this year and required potential new members to submit their information to Cal Poly's Greek Life office before the potential new members were personally provided with the addresses of the fraternities' events. I documented each fraternity rush event with video and/or photos as they were happening. Several fraternities also posted the events on their Instagram stories with the address or time, which correspond to each of their Instagram posts about the date, time, and address of the events. Unfortunately, most of my submissions to AskSLO were not cited. Code enforcement claims they "did not find any evidence that the property is being used as an illegal fraternity." I'm not sure how these events were overlooked because there were obvious fraternity rush parties at every one of the addresses reported at the exact date and time that I submitted to the City via AskSLO . How were these fraternity events missed 216 when there were crowds of guys and large signs with Greek letters? If code enforcement staff was unable to confirm the rush events listed because of they don't work weekends, could the city have SLOPD verify them? Somehow, code enforcement needs to be able to document these illegal fraternity events that happen every weekend during the academic year so there needs to be a better system since these were not cited when they were blatantly obvious to any observer. Additionally, I was able to identify and document many other rush events at illegal fraternity houses during the weekend including the addresses listed at the bottom of this email. Most have been operating as illegal fraternity houses for a long time, and many are the main chapter houses for their fraternity in R-1 and R-2 residential neighborhoods, where they are not allowed. Since I know the specific addresses historically tied to each fraternity, the events weren't difficult to find because each fraternity posted its schedules with the date and time of each event. I knew the addresses from the previous years of their fraternity operations so it was simple to check those locations during the times listed on their rush schedule. The events also had crowds and Greek signage/booths in front of their houses. I've attached documentation to show that the fraternities I submitted to Ask SLO hosted rush events at illegal fraternity houses. Please use this information to reconsider the violations I previously submitted to code enforcement via Ask SLO. If you need the videos, I will provide them. I will follow up with more documentation for rush events at the other addresses listed below that have not yet been submitted to AskSLO. This weekend is the final weekend of rush (10/11 - 10/13) and Monday (10/14) is "bid night" so there will be LARGE parties at all the fraternities. Then it will be a free-for-all every weekend until winter break, and start again from the new year until summer. The addresses of events that held rush events are below and SLOPD should be aware that these properties are operating as illegal fraternity houses. Each of the properties will likely hold events this weekend. The "main chapter houses" will probably host their bid night events on Monday, 10/14/2024. Please let SLOPD know so they can respond instead of sending SNAP. 1684 Mill Street (Delta Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 281 Albert Drive (Delta Upsilon) 248-250 Grand Ave (Theta Chi) 281 Hathway Ave (Kappa Sigma) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 348 Hathway Ave (Phi Kappa Psi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1525 Slack St (Sigma Pi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 2090 Hays (Sigma Epsilon) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1218 Bond St (Alpha Sigma Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1229 Fredericks (Phi Gamma Delta aka FIJI) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 654 Graves (Zeta Beta Tau) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 299 Albert (Alpha Sigma Pi) 12 Hathway (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1841 Slack St (Sigma Nu) 66 Rafael (Pi Kappa Phi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE IN THE CITY 1820 Hope (Theta Chi) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 322 Hathway (Kappa Sigma) 1908 Loomis (Phi Sigma Kappa) 1276 Bond St (Phi Kappa Psi) 237 Albert Dr (Phi Kappa Psi) 217 124 Stenner (Sigma Pi) 171 Orange (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1646 Fredericks St (Zeta Beta Tau) 1868 Loomis (Delta Upsilon) 260 Chaplin (Phi Delta Theta) MAIN CHAPTER HOUSE 1632 Fredericks (Sigma Nu) 255 Chaplin (Alpha Sigma Phi) Sincerely, -Kathie Walker Event posted on Instagram for rush event Phi Sigma Kappa Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at1908 Loomis rush event 10/5/2024 at 6 p.m. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event also posted Phi Sigma Kappa’s Instagram story promoting their rush event at 1908 Loomis from 6-10 pm (photo taken in backyard of Phi Sigma Kappa’s main Fraternity house at 348 Hathway Ave) Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Sigma Nu at 1841 Slack St Saturday Oct 5, 2 – 6 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at Sigma Nu event, 1841 Slack 10/5/2024 at 3 p.m. The signage was still set up on Sunday afternoon, Oct 6, 2024 Sigma Nu’s Instagram also identifies fraternity members living in that “established house”. The SLOMC defines a fraternity as a house where fraternity members live that holds events. The post, below, was made on 10/1/2024 Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm Photo of event in progress. Fraternity lettering posted at Phi Kappa Psi’s event, 1276 Bond St, 10/5/2024, 6 p.m. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi Saturday Oct 5, 6 – 10 pm 1276 Bond St Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush event for Phi Kappa Psi at 237 Albert Sunday Oct 6, 10 am – 2 pm Photo of event in progress. Phi Kappa Psi posted rush event at 237 Albert Dr, 10/6/2024 on their Instagram story NOTE: 237 Albert has been an illegal fraternity house for several years. Documentation shows ongoing fraternity events at this address. Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Instagram for rush events for Delta Sigma Phi at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St Friday Oct 4, 3-5 pm and Sunday 10/6, 6-10 pm Violation submitted on Ask SLO app before the event was held at the illegal fraternity Event posted on Delta Sigma Phi’s Instagram stories for rush event on Friday 10/4/2024 at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St (Friday Oct 4, 3-5 pm) Event posted on Delta Sigma Phi’s Instagram stories for rush event on Sunday 10/6/2024 at their main fraternity house at 1684 Mill St (Sunday Oct 6, 6-10 pm) 224 From:Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2024 12:45 PM To:Hanh, Hannah Subject:Re: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review Attachments:image004.png 蹖蹗 Adam Wechsler reacted via Gmail On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:31 AM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Adam, Great, thank you for confirming. I will provide more details on the agenda as the date approaches. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:02 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review 225 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Hannah, Thank you for reaching out, and I apologize for the delayed response. Yes, November 13th,2024 at 6 P.M. works for me. Thank you once again. Best, Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:52 PM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Adam, Hope you are doing well. I received your contact information from Community Development – Deputy Director, Tyler Corey. I wanted to follow up on City staff’s conversations with you regarding the violations of Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at 280 California Blvd. Due to these violations, City staff is initiating a re- review of the CUP with the Planning Commission. I am looking to schedule the Planning Commission hearing for the re-review on Wednesday, November 13, 2024 at 6:00 pm at City Hall. Please let me know if you are able to attend that date and time. Sincerely, 226 Hannah Hanh Associate Planner The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 227 From:Ella Captain <kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2024 10:27 AM To:Diepenbrock, Arlen Cc:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola; Salem, Rami Subject:Re: Cal Poly KKG Fire Inspection Scheduling That sounds great, thank you so much! Best, Ella Captain President, Eta Rho Chapter Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 310-978-5874 kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 10:20 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: Lets do Thursday 1th at 5 pm. Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 228 From: Ella Captain <kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:36 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Cal Poly KKG Fire Inspection Scheduling This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello! My name is Ella Captain and I am the Chapter President for Kappa Kappa Gamma at Cal Poly. I would like to schedule our fire inspection for next Wednesday, the 16th after 5:30 pm or next Thursday the 17th after 5:00 pm. Please let me know if either of those times works for you. Thank you so much! Best, Ella Captain President, Eta Rho Chapter Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 310-978-5874 kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com 229 From:Diepenbrock, Arlen Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2024 10:21 AM To:Ella Captain Cc:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola; Salem, Rami Subject:RE: Cal Poly KKG Fire Inspection Scheduling Lets do Thursday 1th at 5 pm. Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Ella Captain <kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:36 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Cal Poly KKG Fire Inspection Scheduling This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello! My name is Ella Captain and I am the Chapter President for Kappa Kappa Gamma at Cal Poly. I would like to schedule our fire inspection for next Wednesday, the 16th after 5:30 pm or next Thursday the 17th after 5:00 pm. Please let me know if either of those times works for you. Thank you so much! Best, Ella Captain President, Eta Rho Chapter Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 310-978-5874 kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com 230 232 From:Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2024 9:33 AM To:Diepenbrock, Arlen Subject:Re: Annual Fire Inspection Works for me. We are looking forward to meeting with you then. Adam Wechsler On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 9:22 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: Lets do 330 on Monday the 14th. Sound good? Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 6:15 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Annual Fire Inspection Hello, Monday works best for me. I’m available after 12 P.M. Please let me know if that works for you. 233 Best, Adam Wechsler On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 7:43 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: Monday, Tuesday and Thursday are mostly open. Pick a time that works for you. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications -----Original Message----- From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 8:18 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Annual Fire Inspection This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. ________________________________ Hello, To whom it may concern, my name is Adam Wechsler and I am serving as the President of Alpha Epsilon Pi. I am reaching out to inquire as to whether I can schedule our fire inspection at our lettered property, 280 California Blvd. What times do you have available the week of October 13th to the 19th? Please let me know, and I look forward to your response. Thank you in advance. 234 Best, Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology 239 From:Hanh, Hannah Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 4:29 PM To:Sheats, Steven Subject:FW: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review Hi Steve, I wanted to let you know that I am working on the re-review of the fraternity at 280 California. It is on schedule for Planning Commission re-review on November 13 th, so I’ll begin writing the staff report in the next week or so. Tyler shared a copy of the CUP resolution and NOV, dated March 13, 2024, with me. Is there any other background information you have on file and could share that would be helpful? Thanks! Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:02 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Hannah, Thank you for reaching out, and I apologize for the delayed response. Yes, November 13th,2024 at 6 P.M. works for me. Thank you once again. Best, Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter 240 Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:52 PM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Adam, Hope you are doing well. I received your contact information from Community Development – Deputy Director, Tyler Corey. I wanted to follow up on City staff’s conversations with you regarding the violations of Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at 280 California Blvd. Due to these violations, City staff is initiating a re- review of the CUP with the Planning Commission. I am looking to schedule the Planning Commission hearing for the re-review on Wednesday, November 13, 2024 at 6:00 pm at City Hall. Please let me know if you are able to attend that date and time. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 242 From:Beres, Jason Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 2:13 PM To:Aiden Foote Subject:Re: Haunted House 10/31/2024 That would be fine. Jason SLOFD Get Outlook for iOS From: Aiden Foote < Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 2:03:20 PM To: Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Haunted House 10/31/2024 Thank you for getting back to me so quickly! I get out of class today at 4 so I could swing by the fire station somewhere in between 4:30 and 5. Would that work for you? On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 3:05 PM Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> wrote: Aiden, Good afternoon. First of all, thank you for reaching out to my office for additional guidance regarding the upcoming special event (Haunted House) at your residence during the Halloween holiday. As time permits this week, please feel free to contact my office to coordinate return of the SLOFD Community Event Checklist / Event Safety Plan and to further discuss your inquiry regarding flame retardant treatment for flammable furnishings as noted below. See attachments provided Please note that I have a window tomorrow afternoon (after 4pm) if you would like to stop by the Fire Station to discuss further. Thank you, Jason Beres Fire Inspector III Fire Department Fire Prevention 2160 Santa Barbara Avenue, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-5240 E jberes@slocity.org T 805.594.8021 slocity.org 243 Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Aiden Foote < Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:51 PM To: Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: Haunted House 10/31/2024 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello Jason, This is Aiden Foote with Kappa Chi fraternity reaching out about doing our annual haunted house event at 844 Upham st this halloween. I wanted to get this email out as soon as possible considering the encroaching date of Halloween in order to get the permits completed, to schedule an inspection date, and to provide any other information you will need. As well as this, I had some questions and concerns about fireproofing our tarps this year and was hoping you could lead me in the right direction. Thank you so much, Aiden Foote 246 From:Sheats, Steven Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 12:20 PM To:Tyler Corsello Cc:Corey Cohen; Hayley Townley; Joshua Schenk Subject:RE: Fraternity Use Permit Attachments:280 California Use Permit.pdf Sure thing. It’s old and blurry but it is discernable. Thank you, Steve From: Tyler Corsello <tyler@espondaassociates.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 12:17 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Cc: Corey Cohen <corey@espondaassociates.org>; Hayley Townley <hayleytownley@gmail.com>; Joshua Schenk <josh@espondaassociates.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity Use Permit This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Thanks, Steve! Do you have a copy of our current Permit so we can cross reference and note some of the updates we may expect Thanks again, On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 3:14 PM Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Good afternoon, Following up on yesterday’s conversation. Here is a link to the events regarding the new fraternity use permit. You can see all the documents related to it. If you scroll to the top of the page you will find a link to watch the meeting remotely. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer 247 Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications -- Tyler Corsello Director of Facilities and Operations (317) 876-1913 ext. 125 www.espondaassociates.org Please click here to report any maintenance issues. This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, use or distribution of the information included in this message and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and immediately and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Thank you. 260 From:Jakob Zuckermandel <president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 9:31 AM To:Diepenbrock, Arlen Cc:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola; Salem, Rami Subject:Re: Delta Chi Fire Inspection Arlen, Thanks for the fast response Wed 10/16 9-10 am works great for us. See you then, -------------------------------------------------------- Jakob Zuckermandel President Delta Chi Fraternity California Polytechnic State University president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com ( On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 7:39 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: I have Wed 9-10 or 4-5 available. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 261 From: Jakob Zuckermandel <president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 7:58 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org>; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Delta Chi Fire Inspection This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Arlen, This is Jakob Zuckermandel from Delta Chi. We are reaching out to offer a date for the inspection. Our preferred date would be Wednesday, October 16th. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks, -------------------------------------------------------- Jakob Zuckermandel President Delta Chi Fraternity California Polytechnic State University president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com ( 262 From:Hanh, Hannah Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:56 AM To:Sandra Rowley Subject:RE: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Hi Sandra, Here is a link to the City Council agenda next Tuesday, October 15th at 5:30 pm. The fraternity appeal is Item 6b, which is the second hearing item. It will be held in the same location and same room as the Planning Commission hearing at City Hall in the Council Chambers. If you have a PowerPoint that you would like to share, please email me a copy by next Monday, October 14 th at noon (12:00 pm), and I will have it ready for you the next evening. As the appellant, you will have 10 minutes to speak/present your appeal and you may choose to reserve a portion of those minutes for any responses/rebuttals. Let me know if you have any questions leading up to the hearing next week. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Monday, July 15, 2024 5:04 PM To: Sandra Rowley < Subject: RE: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Hi Sandra, I understand the frustration and apologize for the schedule change. The City Council reviews a multitude of projects from different departments and divisions, so the lead time for the next available hearing date is usually a minimum of 3 to 4 months. Staff aims to keep the overall meeting time of each hearing to within 3.5 hours. However, overall time is highly dependent on public comment and discussion by the Council for each item. If it is anticipated that certain projects (that were scheduled prior) would take longer due to public interest and/or required discussion, then there may be minor adjustments to the overall hearing schedule. I do not anticipate that there would be any other changes that would move this appeal further out. The appeal is scheduled for the City Council hearing on October 15th, which is to start at 5:30 pm. I will provide confirmation and more details as the date approaches. 263 Thank you for your flexibility, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Friday, July 12, 2024 2:44 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Hi Hannah, I noticed that the previously scheduled date also included the time as 5:30 pm, but that's when the City Council meeting begins. Previously, a specific time slot was determined/scheduled - either during the scheduled meeting or earlier in the day. The originally scheduled appeal (October 1st) was just over three months after I submitted the paperwork; double that for other than Muni Code types of appeals. This new date adds two weeks. Is there any guarantee that something else "more important" won't intervene again? I know the governing paragraph doesn't specify a time frame, but I doubt the intent was to put it off until... ??? Also, it appears that the longer the wait to establish a set date/time for the appeal, the greater the chance that time slots will be filled and the appeal date postponed. Hoping for some resolution to this quandary. Thanks, Sandy 17.126.050 Hearings and notice. A. Action on appeals shall be “de novo” review and shall be considered at the same type of hearing and after the same notice tha t is required for the original decision. B. Once an appeal has been filed, it shall be scheduled for the earliest available meeting, considering public notice requirements and scheduled hearings, unless the appellant agrees to a later date. (Ord. 1650 § 3 (Exh. B), 2018) On Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 10:18:34 AM PDT, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Sandra, Apologies for the change – 264 Due to scheduling constraints, the hearing for the appeal has been rescheduled to the next available City Council Hearing on Tuesday, October 15, 2024. Please plan to attend that evening. I will provide more information as the date approaches. Sincerely, Hannah From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 11:56 AM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Thank you for the information, Hannah. Sandy On Thursday, June 27, 2024 at 09:16:07 AM PDT, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Sandra, I wanted to confirm receipt of your appeal. In looking at the hearing schedule, the next available City Council date would be Tuesday, October 1, 2024 at 5:30 pm. Please plan to attend at that time. As the date approaches, more details will be provided. Please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. Thank you, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 265 From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 5:10 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill I decided to take the extra time and come in on Monday, but thank you for making this extra effort. On Thursday, June 20, 2024 at 04:53:22 PM PDT, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: If you happen to come by the City Clerk’s office tomorrow, please note that doors are locked on Fridays. However, there is staff onsite and posted signs to call the office (805-781-7114) for any questions, specific appointments, etc. I’ve given their office a heads up that you may be stopping by tomorrow. If so, please call their office line when you arrive and someone will assist you with taking in the appeal form. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 4:37 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Thank you for the clarification! On Thursday, June 20, 2024 at 03:17:17 PM PDT, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: 266 Hi Sandra, The appeal period begins after a decision is made, so the next day (Thursday, June 13th) would be Day 1 for submitting an appeal. You can complete and submit the linked appeal form to the City Clerk’s office either on Friday, June 21st (tomorrow) or the last day on Monday, June 24th (extended to next business day because Day 10 is a Saturday). Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 3:00 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill Hi Hannah, Thank you for the link! Are you absolutely certain that Day 10 falls on Saturday? I didn't know whether the date of the meeting was counted as Day 1 or not - so I figured it would be better to shoot for Friday than to be told I was a day late. Regards, Sandy On Thursday, June 20, 2024 at 02:08:10 PM PDT, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Sandra, Thank you for reaching out. 267 The resolution for that Conditional Use Permit was recently finalized and published here: Resolution No. PC-1085-24 Conditions #14 and #15 were included based on the Planning Commission’s direction, and Condition #16 was a new condition presented by staff during the hearing to address noise concerns. Aside from the inclusion of these conditions (and renumbering of the subsequent conditions), no other changes were made. I also want to note that the 10th day of the appeal period ends on a Saturday (June 22nd), so it is extended to the next business day on Monday, June 24th, per Section 17.126.020. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2024 10:56 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org>; hannahanh@slocity.org Subject: Conditional Use Permit, 1264 E. Foothill This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Hannah, Please send me the updated Conditional Use Permit approved/granted by the Planning Commission for the fraternity at 1264 E. Foothill. I plan to appeal the Commission's decision regarding some of the conditions... but I believe additional conditions were added to the ones listed on the attachment contained in the Staff Report. Since my appeal must be submitted within 10 days, coming up on Friday, and the last Resolution posted on-line is from May, I'm in a bind! Please...help! Sandra Rowley 268 From:Hanh, Hannah Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:54 AM To:Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta Subject:RE: 06/12 Planning Commission Hearing - Lambda Chi Alpha Hi Thomas, Here is a link to the City Council agenda next Tuesday, October 15th at 5:30 pm. The fraternity appeal is Item 6b, which is the second hearing item. It will be held in the same location and same room as the Planning Commission hearing at City Hall in the Council Chambers. If you have a PowerPoint that you would like to share, please email me a copy by next Monday, October 14 th at noon (12:00 pm), and I will have it ready for you the next evening. As the applicant, you will have 10 minutes to speak/present the project and you may choose to reserve a portion of those minutes for any responses/rebuttals. Let me know if you have any questions leading up to the hearing next week. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 5:15 PM To: Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta <slolca.alpha@gmail.com> Subject: RE: 06/12 Planning Commission Hearing - Lambda Chi Alpha Hi Thomas, Sorry about that – I thought our office had sent a hard copy in the mail. Here is a direct link to the resolution for the approval by Planning Commission: Resolution No. PC-1085-24 Since an appeal was filed, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is pending review by the City Council on October 15 th. There will be an updated resolution once the decision by Council is made at that hearing. If the project is ultimately approved, the updated resolution will have the final set of conditions. Let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, 269 Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta <slolca.alpha@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 1:28 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 06/12 Planning Commission Hearing - Lambda Chi Alpha Hannah, Hope your summer is well. Could you please forward me the copy of the conditional use permit. I never received it after the hearing. Best Regards, Thomas Symer ΛXA 2024 President Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo ( slolca.alpha@gmail.com On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 11:57 AM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Good morning Thomas, Public comment was submitted on your item for the hearing tomorrow tonight. The comments can be found here. Please note that this webpage will be updated whenever the City Clerk receives correspondences, so I recommend that you revisit the link periodically prior to the hearing. After staff’s presentation tomorrow, you will have the opportunity to speak on behalf of the project. If you have a PowerPoint that you would like to share as part of your presentation, please send it to me by 10:00 am tomorrow and I will have it ready for you at the hearing. 270 Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2024 8:49 PM To: 'Christopher Hanson' < Cc: 'Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta' <slolca.alpha@gmail.com> Subject: RE: CUP #3 Hi Chris and Thomas, The agenda for the June 12th Planning Commission hearing was published yesterday. Please see Item 4.a for the staff report. Let me know if you have any questions leading up to the hearing. I will let you know about public correspondences received. Sincerely, Hannah From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Monday, June 3, 2024 11:09 AM To: Christopher Hanson < Subject: RE: CUP #3 271 Thanks Chris. I also received the site plan from Chris Allen. I will follow up with a link to the agenda and staff report once they are published on Wednesday. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Christopher Hanson < Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 6:25 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: RE: CUP #3 Hi Hannah, Here is the proposal with the updates you requested. If you haven't received it yet our architect will send you the other information you wanted early next week. Best, Chris On 05/17/2024 5:09 PM PDT Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: 272 Hi Thomas and Chris, I wanted to follow up on the status of the two items requested in my previous emails. Could you let me know where you are at with those? Sincerely, Hannah From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 11:28 AM To: Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta <slolca.alpha@gmail.com>; Chris Hanson < Subject: RE: CUP #3 Hi Thomas and Chris, Glad you’re able to make it, Thomas! For your reference, attached is a copy of the staff report for Delta Gamma. Friendly reminder to please send me the revised site plan (show the entire property) and project statement (minor revisions to the parking descriptions and special event schedule). If you can send both to me by this Wednesday, that would be great. Thanks, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner 273 Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Lambda Chi Alpha - Phi Sigma Zeta <slolca.alpha@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2024 9:00 PM To: Chris Hanson < Cc: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: CUP #3 Hi Hannah, I'm Thomas! I'll be there on June 12! Could you please send me a copy of the staff report for the Deltas Gamma hearing, so I can know what to expect. Thank you! Best Regards, Thomas Symer ΛXA 2024 President Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo ( slolca.alpha@gmail.com On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 8:29 PM Chris Hanson < wrote: 274 I have found a replacement for the hearing. Thomas Symer, the president of our fraternity, will be there in my place. He is very familiar with this process and knows the workings of the chapter better than anyone. Ive cc’d him on this and he should be included in any emails from the city going forward. On May 9, 2024, at 14:44, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Yes – if you’re not able to make it, you can have someone else attend in your place. Please make sure that they are well acquainted with the organization and how it would be run. The Planning Commission will definitely have questions on the operations. If you can find someone in your stead, I’ll keep the project on for June 12th. Let me know. From: Chris Hanson < Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2024 2:05 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: CUP #3 I will do my best to move my schedule around to make it but in the chance that I cannot can I have someone attend in my place? It is someone who is very familiar with this project and they will have all of the pertinent information. On May 9, 2024, at 13:30, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Chris, The schedule for public hearings have predetermined dates, times, and locations, so unfortunately dates/times cannot be shifted. 275 The next hearing would be on June 26th at 6:00 pm. Let me know if that works. There are currently two projects on the agenda and yours would be the third, so it may run a bit late. Sincerely, Hannah From: Chris Hanson < Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2024 11:34 AM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: CUP #3 Hi Hannah, Sorry for the change, but I made a calendar mistake and cannot make the hearing on June 12th at 6pm. Is there any way we can move it to the day before or shift the time earlier in the day? Best, Chris On May 8, 2024, at 16:09, Chris Hanson < wrote: Hi Hannah, Yes that will work. I will get you the information you requested soon. 276 Thanks, Chris On May 7, 2024, at 08:39, Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Thanks Chris. I can go ahead and prepare your application for the next available Planning Commission hearing on June 12th. The hearing would start at 6:00 pm in the Council Chambers at 990 Palm Street. Please let me know if this date works. For your reference, I’ve attached a staff report of a CUP for Delta Gamma that was processed in 2021. I wanted to provide an example of the staff report, so you have a general understanding of the anticipated analysis, conditions, etc. I have a few other minor items I need for my staff report – 1. Could you provide a full site plan of 277 the entire property, specifically with the interesting property line locations on the Monte Vista side? Please also include a callout of the 20’ setback. 2. The latest project statement (attached) I have is out of date from June 2023. I highlighted two parts to revise – (1) the parking information to match the revised parking layout on the plans and (2) the tentative social calendar. For the purposes of this application, you can include general dates for rushes and events that are expected to occur annually (e.g., October – Fall Rush; December – Fall Quarter Philanthropy, etc.) Please note that the revised plans and project statement will be included as attachments to my staff report for your CUP. Sincerely, 278 Hannah Hanh Associate Planner <image001.png> Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> <image005.png> <image006.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications From: Christopher Allen <cwa.arch@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 10:48 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Cc: Chris Hanson < ; cgatley@edenbridgehome s.com; jeff@witous.com; brady@uniongreenpartner s.com Subject: Re: CUP #3 Hello Hannah 279 Here you are. Let me know if you need anything else! Best - Chris CHRISTOPHER W. ALLEN, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP ® ARCHITECT | SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER | LECTURER CWA Studios | garcia architecture + design | GC Building Company | Cal Poly, SLO 1238 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 www.cwastudios.com | Cell. 805.286.5186 On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 4:54 PM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Chris, I wanted to follow up on this review. There are just a few minor comments for the plans. Could you please make the following revisions: 280 1. Show parki ng spac es #17 and #18 on the oppo site drive way along the west prope rty line (inste ad of along the east prope rty line). This revis ed layou t woul d comp ly with the City’s parki ng stand ards for acce ss. 2. Provi de floor plan showi ng 281 the use of the area next to parki ng spac e #9 in Buildi ng B. This area may be used for stora ge. If these revisions can be provided by end of next week, I can schedule the Conditional Use Permit for the next available Planning Commission hearing on Wednesday, June 12th. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner 282 <image001. png> Community Developme nt 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401- 3218 E hhanh@sloc ity.org T 805.781.743 2 slocity.org <image002. png> <image003. png> <image004. png> <image005. png> <image006. png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications From: Hanh, Hannah Sent: Monday, April 22, 2024 10:40 AM 283 To: Chris Hanson < Cc: cgatley@ed enbridgeho mes.com; jeff@witous. com; brady@unio ngreenpartn ers.com; Christopher Allen <cwa.arch@ gmail.com> Subject: RE: CUP #3 Hi Chris, I have your project in my queue to review later this week. If all comments are addressed, I anticipate that the Planning Commission hearing for the Conditional Use Permit will be sometime in June. I’ll follow up with information on next steps by 284 early next week. Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner <image001. png> Community Developme nt 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401- 3218 E hhanh@sloc ity.org T 805.781.743 2 slocity.org <image002. png> <image003. png> <image004. png> <image005. png> <image006. png> Stay connected with the City 285 by signing up for e- notifications From: Chris Hanson < Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 1:51 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slo city.org> Cc: cgatley@ed enbridgeho mes.com; jeff@witous. com; brady@unio ngreenpartn ers.com; Christopher Allen <cwa.arch@ gmail.com> Subject: Re: CUP #3 Hi Hannah, Just wanted to follow up on the parking approval for the property. Do you have a rough timeline for 286 the remainder of the process? Also please let me know if you need any additional documents or information for the proposal. Thanks, Chris O n A p r 9 , 2 0 2 4 , a t 1 4 : 5 3 , H a n h , H a n n 310 From:Julian Smith < Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:51 AM To:Diepenbrock, Arlen Subject:Re: Fire Inspection ( Thanks! On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:21 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: Yep, Ill put you down. What is a good phone number for you? Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Julian Smith < Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:11 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fire Inspection Can you do 2 pm next Tuesday the 15th? 311 Best, Julian Smith On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 7:44 AM Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> wrote: I have Monday, Tuesday and Thursday mostly open. Pick a time that works for you and we can schedule it. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Julian Smith < Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:54 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: eaielloc@calpoly.edu; cpphipsipresident@gmail.com Subject: Fire Inspection This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello Arlen Diepenbrock, 312 My name is Julian Smith, and I am contacting you on behalf of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity at Cal Poly to schedule a fire inspection next week. I am the house manager and am more than happy to work with you and your team to coordinate a date so this process can run as smoothly as possible. Please get back to me with the next steps for us as soon as possible. Best, Julian Smith 323 From:Diepenbrock, Arlen Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 7:39 AM To:Jakob Zuckermandel; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola Cc:Salem, Rami Subject:RE: Delta Chi Fire Inspection I have Wed 9-10 or 4-5 available. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Jakob Zuckermandel <president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 7:58 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org>; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Delta Chi Fire Inspection This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Arlen, This is Jakob Zuckermandel from Delta Chi. We are reaching out to offer a date for the inspection. Our preferred date would be Wednesday, October 16th. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks, -------------------------------------------------------- Jakob Zuckermandel President Delta Chi Fraternity California Polytechnic State University president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com ( 324 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 1:40 AM To:Buckley, Nick Subject:Ask SLO Request #: 8340 is 7 days past due This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Request # 8340 from the Government Outreach System is 7 days late. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Reported by: Description: Friday 10/4/2024 and Sunday 10/6/2024, Fraternity rush events scheduled at this property which is an illegal fraternity in an R-2 zone and the main Chapter house for Phi Sigma Kappa at 348 Hathway Ave. See link for Fall Rush Registration 2024 here: https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo The fraternity's Instagram page also identifies this property at 348 Hathway Ave as the main Chapter house with ongoing events in many posts. https://www.instagram.com/phisigslo/ This request replaces Request #8338 because wrong address was entered on that Request. Thank you. Expected Close Date: 10/02/2024 Click here to access the request 325 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 9, 2024 1:40 AM To:Buckley, Nick Subject:Ask SLO Request #: 8339 is 7 days past due This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Request # 8339 from the Government Outreach System is 7 days late. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Reported by: Description: Saturday 10/5/2024, Fraternity rush event scheduled at illegal fraternity satellite house for Phi Sigma Kappa at 1908 Loomis. Posted on Instagram and at link:https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo Fall Rush '24 Schedule Expected Close Date: 10/02/2024 Click here to access the request 329 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 6:50 PM To:Kemp, Caleb Subject:RE: Frat presentation 10/20 Thank you! From: Kemp, Caleb <ckemp@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 5:27 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frat presentation 10/20 He was notified and Intime was updated. Thanks! From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 2:27 PM To: Kemp, Caleb <ckemp@slocity.org> Subject: Frat presentation 10/20 Hi, I got the time wrong on the frat presentation on 10/20. It’s at 1pm, not 6:10pm. Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 331 From:Beres, Jason Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 3:06 PM To:Aiden Foote; Rapp, Kim Subject:Re: Haunted House 10/31/2024 Attachments:Special Event Checklist (SLOFD).docx; Haunted House Requirements Form.pdf Aiden, Good afternoon. First of all, thank you for reaching out to my office for additional guidance regarding the upcoming special event (Haunted House) at your residence during the Halloween holiday. As time permits this week, please feel free to contact my office to coordinate return of the SLOFD Community Event Checklist / Event Safety Plan and to further discuss your inquiry regarding flame retardant treatment for flammable furnishings as noted below. See attachments provided Please note that I have a window tomorrow afternoon (after 4pm) if you would like to stop by the Fire Station to discuss further. Thank you, Jason Beres Fire Inspector III Fire Department Fire Prevention 2160 Santa Barbara Avenue, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-5240 E jberes@slocity.org T 805.594.8021 C slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Aiden Foote < Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:51 PM To: Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: Haunted House 10/31/2024 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello Jason, This is Aiden Foote with Kappa Chi fraternity reaching out about doing our annual haunted house event at 844 Upham st this halloween. I wanted to get this email out as soon as possible considering the encroaching date of Halloween in order to get the permits completed, to schedule an inspection date, and to provide any other 332 information you will need. As well as this, I had some questions and concerns about fireproofing our tarps this year and was hoping you could lead me in the right direction. Thank you so much, Aiden Foote San Luis Obispo City Fire Department Community Event Self-Inspection Checklist All items must be completed prior to event participation. Please initial and sign below when completed: Name of Participant (print):_________________________________ Date:____________________ Name of Business:_________________________________________ Phone:___________________ ______________________________________ Rodger Maggio, Fire Marshal (805) 781-7386 1. Emergency Access:  A minimum 20 ft. fire lane must be maintained at all times (CFC §503.2). Check with the special event sponsor to ensure that your booth does not extend into the fire lane. Booths extending into the fire lane will be removed immediately.  Tents, booths, and vehicles shall maintain a minimum 3ft clearance around all fire hydrants (CFC §507.5.4). Vehicles left unattended and found obstructing access to fire hydrants will be subject to citation, and or towing (CVC §22514). 2. Tents & Canopies:  Tents & canopies used for cooking booths shall be flame retardant, regardless of size (CFC §3104.7).  Tents over 400 square feet and canopies over 700 square feet will require a separate permit. Contact the City Fire Department to obtain separate permit prior to event (CFC §3103.2).  Flammable liquid fueled equipment shall not be used in tents. The refueling of any flammable or combustible liquids shall be performed in an approved location, and at least 20 ft. from tents (CFC §3104.17) 3. General Cooking Requirements:  Solid fuel burning appliances shall be located at least 10 ft. from combustible materials (CFC §3104.15.3).  All cooking booths utilizing either LPG / Propane and or open-flame devices of any kind shall have at least one operable 2A:10BC rated fire extinguisher, placed in a visible location near the exit of the booth (CFC §3104.12).  When deep fat fryers are used for cooking operations, they shall be commercially listed appliances, and located outside of tents and canopies. Fryers shall be kept a minimum of 18” from all tents and canopies. An additional 1-1/2-gallon Type “K” extinguisher is required (CFC §904.12.5.2).  The use of gasoline as a fire-starting material is prohibited.  Hot ashes, smoldering coals, oily materials, or other sources of ignition shall not be deposited into combustible waste containers (City trash containers) at the end of an event. Materials may be discarded in an approved metal container post event (CFC §305.2).  All open-flame devices shall have adequate clearance from combustible materials, such as decorations to prevent the spread of fire (CFC §305.1).  Cooking and heating equipment shall be guarded to prevent accidental contact by persons or materials. Cooking areas shall not be accessible by the public (CFC §603.4.2.2.4). 4. Portable Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) & Propane Cylinders:  Portable cylinders must be U.L. listed and used in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions (CFC §603.4.2.2).  No “homemade” manifolds or similar type heating devices are allowed. All connections and fittings should be tested utilizing a soap/water solution by the business owner prior to conducting cooking operations. 5. General Electrical Safety:  Extension cords shall be properly grounded and listed for outdoor use (CFC §605.5).  Extension cords and other sources of temporary wiring shall be maintained in good working condition, without splices, deterioration or damage (CFC §605.3).  Extension cords shall only be used with portable appliances (CFC §605.5). Check with the special event sponsor to ensure that your electrical wiring has been inspected prior to event.  Electrical motors shall be maintained in a condition free from accumulation of excessive oil, dirt, waste, or debris (CFC §605.8).  Portable power strips shall be plugged directly into an approved power supply. Power strips shall be of the polarized, grounded type and equipped with proper overcurrent protection (CFC §605.4). San Luis Obispo City Fire Department Community Event Self-Inspection Checklist All items must be completed prior to event participation. Please initial and sign below when completed: 335 From:Hanh, Hannah Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:13 PM To:Corey, Tyler; Cohen, Rachel Subject:FW: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review FYI – AEPi attendance confirmed for 11/13 PC From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 1:02 PM To: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Alpha Epsilon Pi - CUP Re-review This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Hannah, Thank you for reaching out, and I apologize for the delayed response. Yes, November 13th,2024 at 6 P.M. works for me. Thank you once again. Best, Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:52 PM Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Adam, Hope you are doing well. I received your contact information from Community Development – Deputy Director, Tyler Corey. I wanted to follow up on City staff’s conversations with you regarding the violations of Alpha Epsilon Pi’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at 280 California Blvd. Due to these violations, City staff is initiating a re- review of the CUP with the Planning Commission. I am looking to schedule the Planning Commission hearing for the re-review on Wednesday, November 13, 2024 at 6:00 pm at City Hall. Please let me know if you are able to attend that date and time. 336 Sincerely, Hannah Hanh Associate Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E hhanh@slocity.org T 805.781.7432 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 341 From:Kemp, Caleb Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:55 AM To:Stevens, John; Crawford, Chad Subject:Fraternity visit with C. Wallace Hi guys, Christine Wallace specifically asked you two to assist with a presentation at some fraternities. This is nothing you will need to prepare for, but here are the dates. Officer Stevens: October 13th from 1800-1915 (Approx) Officer Crawford: October 20th from 1800-1915 (Approx) If you have any issues, please let me know. CW will be here and will ride over with you and prep you on the way. Most of it is on her, but they might have some LE questions that you will be better suited to answer. Thank you both, Caleb Kemp Lieutenant / SWAT Assistant Tactical Commander Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E ckemp@slocity.org T 805.781.7321 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 342 From:Hayley Townley < Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:29 AM To:Sheats, Steven Subject:Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Call my cell please :) Hayley Townley, Broker Comet Realty 805-440-9194 iPhone | iTypos | iApologize On Oct 8, 2024, at 10:23 AM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Yes, we are planning on it. I will call and tie in everyone. Would you like me to call you on your cell or office number? Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:21 AM 343 To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Hi! Just confirming our call today at 11:30. Are you sending a link or a number for us to call in to? Hayley Townley, Broker Comet Realty 805-440-9194 iPhone | iTypos | iApologize On Sep 30, 2024, at 3:10 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Gotcha. I have it on the calendar for now. Let me know either way so that I can reschedule if needed. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 3:09 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 344 They actually are the ones who need to be there to make decisions and hold them accountable. They work for Esponda Associate (the management of the fraternity) and that is who I actually lease the property to. They actually manage the tenants :-) I will send them an email! On Sep 30, 2024, at 3:03 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Hayley, Neither of them were there. I do not have their contact so if you want to invite them, you are more than welcome. I’ll need a number to include them in the conference call if they won’t be in your office during that time. Thank you, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:09 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Hi Steve, I can make it at that time. I think we need at least one representative from the actual chapter, either Tyler Corsello or Corey Cohen from Esponda Associates. Were either of them involved in the conversation you had with the tenants? I just want to make sure they are included. Let me know and I will invite one or both. Putting you on my calendar. I’d also start looking at that trash pile - hahahahaha 345 Hayley Townley Broker®/Owner COMET REALTY Friendly. Professional. Local. c. 805-440-9194 | t. 805-546-9925 | f. 805-546-9905 1110 California Blvd. Suite #C, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Hayley@CometRealty.com DRE #01042135 “We are not your ordinary real estate company.” On Sep 30, 2024, at 9:41 AM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Good morning Hayley, I hope you are doing well. Our team met with four of the tenants on Thursday and discussed the use permit and possible outcomes of the review. They were very respectful and cooperative during the discussion. My director (Timmy) has asked to do a call to discuss with you, the property representative, the use permit and possible outcomes of the hearing. It looks like our team will be available on Tuesday the 8th at 11:30am. Are you available at that time for a phone call? Thank you, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications 346 From: Sheats, Steven Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 8:19 AM To: Hayley Townley < Subject: RE: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Good morning Hayley, Thanks again for meeting with me yesterday. I went by the property afterwards and closed out the trash code case. At the end of the day I was able to speak with Tyler and he is looking up what could be done if the use permit was pulled/revoked as far as how you could go about renting that many rooms in a single residence. His preliminary look into it seems like you can’t have five or more separate leases. But he is going to contact our City Attorney’s Office to see how the zoning code should be interpreted should the property no longer have a use permit. It is also a new one for them as nobody has ever requested to remove a use permit of this nature. The good news is, we have time to figure it all out and work it out with the remainder of the lease. I’m sure we’ll have some answers soon but wanted to let you know it’s already being looked into. Please also keep me posted on what you hear from the owner’s attorney. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 4:34 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Thanks Steven - looking forward to putting a face with a voice :-) On Jun 26, 2024, at 12:54 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: 347 Sounds good. I will be out and about so I’ll come by your office. See you then! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><imag e004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 12:34 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Let’s do July 9th at 2:30 - would like to meet you. I can come to your office, you can come to mine or we can get coffee. Hayley Townley, Broker Comet Realty 805-440-9194 iPhone | iTypos | iApologize 348 On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:48 AM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Hayley, Thanks for reaching out. If you want to meet in person, July 9th would be the best day. If you want to just chat on the phone, any of those days work. Let me know what works best for you. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 5:18 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: 280 California #CODE- 000074-2024 349 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond Hey Steven, I received your letter dated June 19th about the Fraternity Use Permit. Would love to have a conversation about this with you to see what, if anything, I can do to help. Here are some available times: Wednesday, July 3rd between 2-4 Tuesday, July 9th after 2pm Friday, July 12, anytime after 11am Please let me know if any of these times work. If not, we can figure something out. Actually looking forward to figuring this one out with your help. Hayley Townley Broker®/Owner COMET REALTY Friendly. Professional. Local. c. 805-440-9194 | t. 805-546- 9925 | f. 805-546-9905 1110 California Blvd. Suite #C, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Hayley@CometRealty.com DRE #01042135 “We are not your ordinary real estate company.” 372 From:Stowe, Lala Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:03 AM To:Zion, Sarah; Hopkins, Tiffany; Karpovich, Michelle Subject:Re: Fraternity Enforcement meeting Thanks all for your help! I just sent the invite for 10/14 from 9-10 am, with the knowledge that it will need to end at 9:50. Lala Stowe pronouns she/her/hers Supervising Administrative Assistant Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E lstowe@slocity.org T 805.783.7870 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Zion, Sarah <SZion@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 9:47 AM To: Hopkins, Tiffany <thopkins@slocity.org>; Karpovich, Michelle <mkarpovi@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Fraternity Enforcement meeting Hi everyone, Christine can do 10/14 and 10/15 from 4-5. The Monday 10/14 time will work better with her schedule. Sarah Zion pronouns she/her/hers Legal Assistant II City Attorney's Office 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E szion@slocity.org T 805.783.7856 From: Hopkins, Tiffany <thopkins@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 4:11 PM To: Karpovich, Michelle <mkarpovi@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org>; Zion, Sarah <SZion@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Fraternity Enforcement meeting Hi – Chief’s availability below: 373 From: Karpovich, Michelle <mkarpovi@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 4:06 PM To: Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org>; Zion, Sarah <SZion@slocity.org>; Hopkins, Tiffany <thopkins@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Fraternity Enforcement meeting Hey all, Whitney will be OOO 10/16-10/18 at a conference but here’s some time she can squeeze in: 10/14 at 9:00am-9:50am (she has a meeting right after) – Works for Chief 10/15 at 1:00pm-2:00pm or 4:00-5:00pm (would be ideal if they can take place at her office) -Both are possible, but he has another meeting at 2pm Chief will be OoO at a conference on the 21st and the 22nd. Here’s some options for the week after just in case: 10/21 at 11:00am-12:00pm - 11/22 at 2:00-3:00pm Michelle Karpovich Administrative Assistant III Community Services Group & Finance 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mkarpovi@slocity.org T 805.781.7177 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 3:55 PM To: Zion, Sarah <SZion@slocity.org>; Karpovich, Michelle <mkarpovi@slocity.org>; Hopkins, Tiffany <thopkins@slocity.org> Subject: Fraternity Enforcement meeting Hi all, Timmi asked me to set up a meeting, ideally next week, for an hour with Whitney, Christine, and Chief Scott. If you can send me possible times slots, I'll see what we can make work. Thank you, Lala Stowe pronouns she/her/hers Supervising Administrative Assistant Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E lstowe@slocity.org T 805.783.7870 374 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 377 From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, October 7, 2024 9:32 PM To:Christiansen, Lindsay Subject:FW: October 2024 Council Monthly Update Attachments:4. October 2024 Council Monthly Update.pdf For the update meetings please and thank you! Greg From: Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 2:02 PM To: Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: October 2024 Council Monthly Update Bcc: Council_all Please find attached and available at in the City Council folder on SharePoint, the October Council Monthly Update. Teresa Teresa Purrington pronouns she/her/hers City Clerk City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E TPurring@slocity.org T 805.781.7102 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 15 Neighborhood Services:   Public Affairs Mgr Wallace provided a WOW leader presentation on 9/14, a Fraternity Sorority Life presentation to chapter presidents on 9/20. Wallace is scheduled for IFC, PHC and USFC presentations the first week of October to cover noise, SEZ and other neighborhood civility topics  The safety enhancement zone for start of school began on Sept. 17 and concludes on Sept. 30. 388 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, October 7, 2024 3:22 PM To:Courtney Leigh Kienow; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola; Jason Mockford Cc:Mezzapesa, John; Loew, Michael Subject:Fraternities and Outreach Hi Courtney, Elizabeth, and Jason, I hope you all had a nice weekend. As you can imagine, we have begun receiving complaints about fraternity parties at houses in the single-family neighborhoods where fraternity houses are not allowed. I wanted to follow up with this group, since we met late in the school year last year to discuss this issue, to reiterate that these events are impactful to the surrounding community and that the City is more than happy to provide information to Cal Poly or the students about what is and is not allowed, and how to obtain a use permit to get a fraternity/sorority house permitted in allowed zones. Please keep us in the loop about upcoming events/opportunities for outreach. We will continue to respond to complaints that we receive with notices of violation when violations can be verified, however, I believe strongly that education surrounding regulations is also necessary. Please let us know how we can help the University educate student groups about local regulations. Thank you, Timothea (Timmi) Tway Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 401 From:Mezzapesa, John Sent:Monday, October 7, 2024 11:44 AM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Subject:RE: [EXT]RE: Grand Jury Request Attachments:Fraternity & Sorority Use Permits.xlsx New spreadsheet by use permit number with all associated addresses for each. I also included notes on a few that are probably considered void to in inactivity but we just have vetted that out yet. Let me know if this works. John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 U 1146-84 1 Mustang 3/14/1984 Approved Fraternity Possibly void for lack of use per 17.110.090 U 106-98 1236 Monte Vista 8/12/1998 Approved Fraternity Delta Chi USE-0331-2023 1264 Foothill Under Review Fraternity Lamda Chi Alpha 135 Crandall 137 Crandall 123 Crandall 1290 Foothill 1292 Foothill 1304 Foothill 190 Crandall U 144-97 132 California 12/10/1997 Approved Fraternity Alpha Gamma Rho U 799-79 1326 Higuera 11/14/1979 Approved Sorority Gamma Phi Beta USE-0803-2019 1328 Foothill 2/24/2021 Approved Sorority Delta Gamma U 47-10 1335 Foothill 6/13/2013 Approved Fraternity Phi Kappa Psi U 1292-87 1464 Foothill 2/11/1987 Approved Sorority Alpha Chi Omega U 110-13 1716 Osos 11/25/2013 Approved Sorority U 1440-89 180 California 5/24/1989 Approved Sorority Kappa Alpha Theta USE-3369-2016 190 Stenner 11/28/2016 Approved Sorority Alpha Omicron Pi U 314-71 244 California 9/21/1971 Approved Sorority Kappa Kappa Gamma U 1099 280 California 8/2/1983 Approved Fraternity Alpha Epsilon Pi U 0619 570 Pacific 9/7/1977 Approved Possibly void for lack of use per 17.110.090 U 1048 615 Grand 8/11/1982 Approved Sorority Sigma Kappa U 578-82 696 Foothill 6/9/1982 Approved Sorority Can't locate permit - unknown status & conditions. Possibly void for lack of use per 17.110.090 U 41-09 700 Grand 5/27/2009 Approved Sorority Chi Omega U 36-09 720 Foothill 6/24/2009 Approved Fraternity Delta Upsilon None 844 Upham 10/17/1957 Approved Not for Fraternity/Sorority - Permit to "house 8 women students" Approved Fraternity Sigma Nu NotesUse Permit # U 1484-90 U 109-05 Plan Status Organization Type Current Organization Address Permit Approval Date Alpha PhiFraternity4/15/2008 Approved 5/8/1991 Chapter Name Chapter Address Chapter Satellite House Address Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Pl, San Luis Obispo 93405 Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd Alpha Phi 1290 E Foothill Blvd Phi Gamma Delta 1229 Fredericks St Sigma Nu 1304 E Foothill Blvd Alpha Sigma Phi 1218 Bond St. Gamma Phi Beta 1326 Higuera St. Alpha Sigma Phi 299 Albert Delta Gamma 1328 E Foothill Blvd San Luis Obispo CA 93405 Alpha Epsilon Pi 331 Hathway Ave Phi Kappa Psi 1335 E Foothill Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 E Foothill Blvd Alpha Chi Omega 1464 East Foothill Boulevard, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 & 1/2 E Foothill Blvd Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA Lambda Chi Alpha 1251 Monte Vista Place Alpha Omicron Pi 190 Stenner Street San Luis Obispo, 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 1243 Monte Vista Place Kappa Kappa Gamma 244 California Blvd, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 241 Hathway Ave Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 12 Hathway Ave Sigma Kappa 615 Grand Ave San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 285 Chaplin Ln Zeta Beta Tau 654 Graves Ave. Lambda Chi Alpha 253 Albert Dr Chi Omega 700 Grand avenue Lambda Chi Alpha 278 Albert Dr Delta Upsilon 720 E Foothill Blvd, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Lambda Chi Alpha 522 Kentucky St Sigma Pi 1525 Slack St Sigma Pi 124/128 Stenner St Sigma Pi 1555 Slack St Sigma Pi 335 Lemon St Sigma Pi 320 Grand Ave Pi Kappa Phi 66 Rafael Way Pi Kappa Phi 447 N Chorro St Lambda Chi Alpha 274 & 1/2 Hathway avenue Sigma Nu 250 Grand Ave Sigma Nu 301 Hathaway Ave Sigma Nu 1632 Fredricks St Sigma Nu 290 Chaplin Ln Sigma Nu 190 Crandall Way Phi Sigma Kappa 348 Hathway Ave Phi Sigma Kappa 344 Henderson Ave Phi Sigma Kappa 1238 Stafford Sigma Phi Epsilon 568 Ellen Way Sigma Phi Epsilon 2090 Hays Beta Theta Pi 691 Cerro Romauldo Satellite HousesLettered Houses 404 From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2024 8:24 AM To: kathie walker < Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; Sandra Rowley < ; Carolyn Smith < ; Brett Cross < ; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Stewjenkins Info < ; Victoria Wood < ; Karen Adler < ; Steven Walker < ; Loew, Michael <Mloew@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Fraternity operations in neighborhoods and CPRA response BCC:CC Hi Kathie, Thank you for the email and the additional information. I apologize for my weekend email, but I am headed to a conference for a few days and wanted to get you a response as I know this is an in important issue. The Community Development Department remains committed to addressing violations that are occurring through our Code Enforcement program. I appreciate the time you have spent with both John and I to help us understand the issue and provide information that can be used in pursuing compliance. Since our meetings we have taken a number of steps, including multiple meetings with Cal Poly leadership as well as students in the Greek system to educate all 405 parties about the municipal code regulations, and specific discussions about Cal Poly’s online reporting. We also, as you noted below, began a larger effort to gain compliance through our normal code enforcement process. I will be working with the Code Enforcement team to ensure that our record keeping for this process meets our standards, but please be assured that we track each correspondence that is sent and actions taken on addresses related to code compliance. We will continue to pursue compliance both through our attempts to connect with Cal Poly and students and educate, as well as through the traditional code enforcement processes. As we have discussed before, this can be a difficult issue to address through code enforcement for a number of reasons, and code enforcement does need to prioritize their work given their resources and the amount and type of complaints that are received from the public (we have received a record number of code enforcement complaints in recent months). I always appreciate your input as to how you think we can improve. Regarding the CUP at 280 California Boulevard, we have been working on this issue since we received the written complaint. Upon receipt of the complaint, we worked to verify what was reported to us, and began a process to inform the fraternity of their violations and responsibilities under the CUP (this included issuing letters and notices of violation). I requested that the fraternity contact the Department and meet with us so that we could discuss their violations and next steps. This past Thursday (September 26) Code Enforcement staff and I met with the student leadership of the fraternity that occupies 280 California to talk about the requirements of the CUP, let them know that they were in violation of their permit and that their actions were disruptive to the neighborhood, and inform them that the CUP would be presented to the Planning Commission for review. I was hoping to update you this upcoming week with this development once I had a more solid Planning Commission date for you. At this time, it is looking like it will likely be in November or early December, but I will let you know when we have a confirmed date. I hope this information is helpful and I am happy to meet with you to discuss any of this further. I realize this is an impactful, complex issue, and we will continue to work to address it through both education and enforcement. Thank you, Timothea (Timmi) Tway Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: kathie walker < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 9:46 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org>; Sandra Rowley < ; Steven Walker < ; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>; Francis, Emily <EFrancis@slocity.org>; Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org>; Marx, 406 city.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity operations in neighborhoods and CPRA response This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Correction: The Notice of Violation for 1327 E. Foothill was not lost by the CDD but was missing a date, so should not be included in the missing documents listed. The Advisory Letters that were reportedly lost by the Community Development Department (listed on spreadsheet but not included in letters produced) are listed below. My main concern is Kappa Sigma at 281 Hathway, which is the main Chapter house for Kappa Sigma and hosted many documented fraternity events that can be heard from more than a block away. There is ample documentation that 281 Hathway is an active fraternity house, known by SLOPD, and should have been issued a Notice of Violation. Phi Gamma Delta at 1254 Bond is also a problem and is the main Chapter house for the fraternity, listed in Cal Poly's AB 524 report and shown in the documentation from social media posts. 1. Phi Kappa Psi 1740 Fredericks St 2. Phi Kappa Psi 346 Grand Ave 3. Sigma Nu 1621 McCollum St 4. Theta Chi 1661 McCollum St 5. Phi Kappa Psi 237 Albert Dr 6. Phi Gamma Delta 385 Chaplin Ln 7. Kappa Sigma 108 Crandall Wy 8. Theta Chi 1238 E. Foothill Blvd 9. Phi Gamma Delta 1254 Bond St *main Chapter house for the fraternity 10. Theta Chi 191 Kentucky St 11. Kappa Sigma 281 Hathway Ave *main Chapter house for the fraternity 12. Unknown Fraternity 525 El Camino Real 13. Unknown Fraternity 1130 Olive St 14. Unknown Fraternity 618 Felton Wy 15. Used as Event Venue 1010 Paseo DeCaballo Also, I am concerned about the other fraternity houses that were overlooked by Code Enforcement but are listed in Cal Poly's AB 524 Report, and which have hosted rush events and other documented fraternity events. The documentation is attached to my first email. Some of these properties are the main Chapter houses for their fraternity and operate as full-fledged fraternities, as you might imagine that to be. Hopefully, Community Development will solve this ongoing problem. Thank you. -Kathie On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:55 PM kathie walker < wrote: Dear Whitney and Timmi, Nearly a year ago, on 11/8/2023, I met with Timmi Tway and John Mezzapesa to solve the problem of over 60 illegal fraternity houses that have overtaken our neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo. I documented each of the illegal fraternity houses in a report provided during our meeting. 407 Recently, I asked the City for the records sent to the illegal fraternity operations, and the documents, including a spreadsheet of addresses, were sent to me on Monday, 9/22/2024. According to the City, many of the letters sent to the property owners for illegal fraternities were lost by the Community Development Department so were unable to be produced. I am not sure how the City is able to track the illegal operations or follow-up since they've lost the letters. Also, some of the Notices of Violation did not contain a date, therefore the reference to "5 days from this notice" is difficult to enforce because there is no date on the notices. One of the letters also contained the incorrect address because numbers were transposed from 1740 (correct address) to 1704 (address cited in the letter). Finally, the City did not send Notices of Violation or Advisory Letters to many documented fraternities. I have included that information in the document attached to this email. John Mezzapesa has been amazing in working with me. I feel he is overburdened by the amount of work he has to handle and do not blame him for the mistakes that have been made. However, it is apparent that Code Enforcement needs more staff members to handle the problem, and likely others related to substandard housing. I encourage the City Council to keep this need in mind because our neighborhoods are unfairly burdened by the dozens of illegal fraternity houses in residential neighborhoods and it is not right. Aside from the illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhood, no one is monitoring the conditional use permits for existing fraternity operations. After a year of constant parties and disruptive noise starting in 2022, and after they were issued SIX citations including two unruly gatherings within 10 months, my husband filed a complaint against a fraternity's CUP at 280 California Blvd in February. The CUP states that the use permit will be reviewed if a written complaint is made by a resident. I just wanted to let you know that nothing was done. Months went by, the fraternity continued to have loud parties in violation of their CUP and were issued another FIVE citations. My husband and I filed a second complaint against the fraternity. Still, no action has been taken! What is the point of a conditional use permit if the terms of the conditions are not followed? Please follow up with the properties identified in the document attached to this email and let me know what action is being taken regarding the complaints filed against the CUP at 280 California Blvd. Thank you. -Kathie 408 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, October 7, 2024 8:27 AM To:Loew, Michael; Corey, Tyler Subject:FW: Fraternity rush events at Illegal fraternity houses this weekend Forwarding for awareness From: kathie walker < Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 12:24 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Cc: Sandra Rowley < ; Brett Cross < ; Carolyn Smith < ; Stewjenkins Info < ; Victoria Wood < ; Bulbul Rajagopal <brajagopal@newtimesslo.com> Subject: Fraternity rush events at Illegal fraternity houses this weekend This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. San Luis Obispo City Leaders and Representatives, Here we go again. Just like last year, fraternity rush events happened at illegal fraternity houses in SLO's neighborhoods this past weekend. The addresses of the events are posted below. Cal Poly Greek life staff has the list of each event address with the corresponding fraternity and can confirm their locations if they choose to cooperate with the City. The fraternities also passed out cards at a Cal Poly event on Thursday 10/3/2024 with the address locations of each event. Additionally, I have documentation of the events. Many of these addresses were already identified and documented as fraternity operations a year ago. Some are the main chapter houses for the fraternities. The addresses were listed in Cal Poly's AB 524 Report posted on 10/1/2023 and documented in the report, with social media posts and photos, given to Timmi Tway and John Mezzapesa during a meeting on 11/8/2023. Most of these addresses also have a history of noise complaints to SLOPD because they have been fraternity houses for a while. There are also some new fraternity houses this year, including two "main satellite" fraternity houses on our street in an R-1 zone. Friday 10/4/2024: 1684 Mill Street (Delta Sigma Phi) 281 Albert Drive (Delta Upsilon) 248-250 Grand Ave (Theta Chi) 281 Hathway Ave (Kappa Sigma) 348 Hathway Ave (Phi Kappa Psi) 1525 Slack St (Sigma Pi) 2090 Hays (Sigma Epsilon) 1218 Bond St (Alpha Sigma Phi) 1229 Fredericks (Phi Gamma Delta aka FIJI) 654 Graves (Zeta Beta Tau) 409 Saturday 10/5/2024: 654 Graves (Zeta Beta Tau) 299 Albert (Alpha Sigma Pi) 12 Hathway (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1841 Slack St (Sigma Nu) 66 Rafael (Pi Kappa Phi) 1820 Hope (Theta Chi) 322 Hathway (Kappa Sigma) 1908 Loomis (Phi Sigma Kappa) 1276 Bond St (Phi Kappa Psi) Sunday 10/6/2024 237 Albert Dr (Phi Kappa Psi) 348 Hathway Ave (Phi Sigma Kappa) 124 Stenner (Sigma Pi) 2090 Hays (Sigma Epsilon) 171 Orange (Lambda Chi Alpha) 1646 Fredericks St (Zeta Beta Tau) 1229 Fredericks (Phi Gamma Delta aka FIJI) 1868 Loomis (Delta Upsilon) 260 Chaplin (Phi Delta Theta) 1632 Fredericks (Sigma Nu) Another wave of rush events for each fraternity is scheduled for next weekend and then huge parties with alcohol will start happening. Fraternities will begin hosting the various sororities with booming music and screaming disrupting the peace of the City's neighborhoods. The quiet enjoyment of our property will be lost. In addition to the noisy parties, loud parades of sorority members will walk through the neighborhood to attend these parties and wake people as they pass by before and after the parties. It is incredibly miserable to be surrounded by full-fledged fraternity parties Thursday through Sunday. The only way for our family to escape is for us to leave our home. That isn't right. San Luis Obispo Code Enforcement met with Cal Poly staff, including its Greek life administrators, during the last academic year. The City staff explained to Cal Poly staff that the City's laws prohibit fraternity events in our neighborhoods and that fraternity events must be at a permitted fraternity house. It is extremely disappointing that these fraternity rush events were approved by Cal Poly staff, even though they know it is a violation of the City's laws. Further, Cal Poly revised their Party Registration Policy for Greek life in September 2024. The Policy was originally drafted after Carson Starkey's death at an illegal satellite fraternity house, as part of the Deferred Recruitment Compromise, which allowed freshmen to resume pledging fraternities in the fall. In the original Policy, fraternity events were required to be held at (1) a main chapter house, (2) a registered satellite house, or (3) an approved third-party venue. The new Policy allows a fraternity to hold an event at any residence or third- party venue. This Policy was not revised until the City sent Notices of Violation or Advisory Letters to some of the identified illegal fraternity properties. Then Cal Poly indicated that it would no longer keep track of its registered satellite fraternity houses so it would not provide a list of those properties to the City, according to Code Enforcement. One of Cal Poly's attorneys, Maren Hufton, told me the same thing in response to a public records request. 410 Still, each fraternity must register its events with Cal Poly, so there is a record of the addresses where fraternity events are held. Cal Poly staff has approved these 'sanctioned events' at these addresses, even though they understand it is against the City's laws for Cal Poly's fraternities to hold these events in our neighborhoods and that it is detrimental to the City's residents. What is the City doing to solve this problem? What is the timeline for shutting down fraternity operations at known fraternity houses? In other words, how much longer will we have to put up with the known, documented illegal fraternity houses operating in our neighborhood? I appreciate any information you can give me. Sincerely, Kathie Walker 420 From:Perlette, Matthew Sent:Sunday, October 6, 2024 8:30 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:Re: Frat presentation No problem. I'll be sure to come find you before then. Matthew Perlette Police Officer Police Department 1042 Walnut, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E mperlett@slocity.org T 805.594.8029 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 9:55 AM To: Perlette, Matthew <mperlette@slocity.org> Cc: Loll, Bryce <bloll@slocity.org> Subject: Frat presentation Hi Matt, I’ve got a fraternity presentation on Oct. 27th at 8pm and I need a patrol partner to come along. Dickel approved me asking you for the help. These are fun, not like the Creekside Mobile Home Park. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 I’ll throw the event on your calendar via Outlook, but we’ll talk in advance. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager 421 Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 443 From:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent:Saturday, October 5, 2024 10:32 AM To:Salem, Rami; Diepenbrock, Arlen Subject:Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Great! I’ll send an email out for Chapter Presidents to start scheduling with you, Arlen. Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Date: Friday, October 4, 2024 at 3:58 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu>, Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Whether it’s next week or the week after! I’ll make it work. Get Outlook for iOS From: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 3:57:31 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu>; Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 I’m good to start when ever you are ready! Just let me know Get Outlook for iOS From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 2:24:57 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hi all, Should I send out a message to the Chapter Presidents asking them to schedule times with you, Arlen? Or should I wait to hear confirmation from Rami? Best, 444 Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 at 4:42 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Im fine if we push it to the second week in October. That work for you Rami? Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 4:08 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hi Arlen, Do you think we could push it to the week after? Our chapters are right in the middle of recruitment which is their busiest time of year, and I want to make sure they have time to prepare (or at least clean up a little bit) in between recruitment and fire inspections. If not, I'm sure they can make it work! Typically, your department gives me specific dates and specific time ranges within those days that chapters can sign up for, and then I create a sign up sheet to send to them to sign up for a slot. However, since we are requiring the chapter presidents to be present (which I agree is a great idea), I might have them reach out to you 445 to schedule a time by a certain date and cc me in it so I know that they have scheduled it. What do you think? I'm good with either option. Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Why Do Pronouns Matter? Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 3:59:24 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hey Elizabeth, I would like to begin scheduling the inspections for next week. Do you reach out to schedule these or should I begin shootin off emails? We are going to require that the president of the organization be present for the inspection this year so that we can disseminate some critical information. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:34 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org>; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu>; Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Cc: Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Looping in Rami as he will be the officer to perform these inspections. Rami, please work with Arlen to find a time that works for both of you. Thanks, 446 John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 5:20 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Thanks, Ill work with Code Enforcement to hammer out some dates that work for both of us. From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 9:39 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Here is their email address: slolca.alpha@gmail.com Beginning of October works for me! Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 8:34 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>, Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>, Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Elizabeth, Thanks for the update, lets get an email address for the last one on the list and if Code Enforcement is available, depending on availability I would like to begin scheduling these inspections for the beginning of Oct. Please let me know if this works for everyone. 447 Alpha Chi Omega 1464 E Foothill Blvd SLO axo.president.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma 1328 E. Foothill Blvd. dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Gamma Phi Beta 1326 Higuera Street gphibpresident@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi 190 Stenner Street aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi 1290 E Foothill Blvd sloaphipres@gmail.com Chi Omega 700 Grand Avenue chiopres.cp@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma 244 California Blvd kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa 615 Grand Ave sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Pl president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com Phi Kappa Psi 1335 Foothill Blvd cpphipsipresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd cpthetapresident@gmail.com Delta Upsilon 720 Foothill Blvd ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Sigma Nu 1304 East Foothill Blvd Cpsnupresident@gmail.com Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd. aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 Foothill Blvd. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 2:56 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hi Arlen, The only other addition is: Lambda Chi Alpha – 1264 Foothill Blvd. Let me know what week and times work for you and your team and I can get them scheduled! Best, 448 Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Date: Monday, September 23, 2024 at 11:42 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hey Elizabeth, I am looking to begin setting up inspections for the frats and sororities for 2024. Is the below list still current? Are ther e any others that we need to add or update any addresses? Are you still the best contact for this? Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 2:35 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Returning your phone call This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Arlen, Here is the contact information for the houses that had Fire Inspections this Fall: Alpha Chi Omega 1464 E Foothill Blvd SLO axo.president.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma 1328 E. Foothill Blvd. dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com 449 Gamma Phi Beta 1326 Higuera Street gphibpresident@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi 190 Stenner Street aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi 1290 E Foothill Blvd sloaphipres@gmail.com Chi Omega 700 Grand Avenue chiopres.cp@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma 244 California Blvd kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa 615 Grand Ave sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Pl president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com Phi Kappa Psi 1335 Foothill Blvd cpphipsipresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd cpthetapresident@gmail.com Delta Upsilon 720 Foothill Blvd ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Sigma Nu 1304 East Foothill Blvd Cpsnupresident@gmail.com Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd. aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Date: Friday, January 26, 2024 at 9:26 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Returning your phone call Hi Arlen, I’m sorry to have missed your call yesterday, I was out sick. I just tried calling you back but it keeps going straight to voicemail without letting me leave one. Feel free to give me a call back today and I’ll try and catch you, or I’d be happy to answer any questions you have over email! Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me 454 From:Loll, Bryce Sent:Saturday, October 5, 2024 2:31 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:RE: Frat presentation I threw a note in Intime too so he wont get tied up on something else. From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 9:56 AM To: Perlette, Matthew <mperlette@slocity.org> Cc: Loll, Bryce <bloll@slocity.org> Subject: Frat presentation Hi Matt, I’ve got a fraternity presentation on Oct. 27th at 8pm and I need a patrol partner to come along. Dickel approved me asking you for the help. These are fun, not like the Creekside Mobile Home Park. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 I’ll throw the event on your calendar via Outlook, but we’ll talk in advance. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 487 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Friday, October 4, 2024 1:59 AM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8424 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8424 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity operation. Rush event at 237 Albert Drive, sunday 10/6/2024 from 10 am to 2 pm. 237 Albert has been operating as an illegal fraternity house for at least three years. Please do something to stop the illegal fraternity operations in our neighborhood. Location: 237 Albert Drive To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 7, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 488 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Friday, October 4, 2024 1:49 AM To:Mezzapesa, John Subject:Ask SLO Notification of new Request #: 8423 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8423 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to Code Enforcement. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity rush event at a long-standing illegal satellite fraternity house. The event is Sunday 10/6/2024 from 10 am - 2 pm Location: 237 La Canada Drive Expected Close Date: October 7, 2024 Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 489 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Friday, October 4, 2024 1:49 AM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8422 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8422 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity rush event on Saturday 10/5/2024 from 6 pm - 10 pm in an R-1 neighborhood at 1276 Bond Street. This is an illegal satellite fraternity house. Location: 1276 Bond Street To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 7, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 490 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Friday, October 4, 2024 1:42 AM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO Request #: 8378 Due Today Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Request # 8378 from the Government Outreach System is due today. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Reported by: Description: Illegal fraternity event scheduled to be held on 10/5/2024 at one of their unpermitted satellite fraternity houses at 1841 Slack Street, R-1 zone. The rush event is posted on Sigma Nu's Instagram page https://www.instagram.com/sigmanuslo/ Also, see photo of screen capture attached, with event addresses listed. Expected Close Date: 10/04/2024 Click here to access the request 491 From:City of San Luis Obispo <communications@slocity.org> Sent:Thursday, October 3, 2024 3:16 PM To:Iriarte, Juanita Subject:[Test] New Public Notice Available This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. View this email in your browser To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Recent public notices posted by the City of San Luis Obispo: City Council Public Hearing Posted on Thurs, 26 Sep 2024, 8:49 AM The San Luis Obispo City Council will hold a public hearing on October 15, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. to discuss an appeal regarding a fraternity's Conditional Use Permit, the continuation of the Tourism Business Improvement District, and the intention to abandon portions of the City right of way for a Cal Poly faculty housing project… Read the full public notice » Copyright © 2024 City of San Luis Obispo, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website. Our mailing address is: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Add us to your address book 492 Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 493 From:Hanh, Hannah Sent:Thursday, October 3, 2024 2:16 PM To:Corey, Tyler Subject:FW: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit To confirm – is the fraternity president, Adam Wechsler (see email below) the person who you, Timmi, and Code Enforcement have been in contact with? If not, please let me know who the appropriate contact is and I will follow up to confirm details for the re-review hearing with PC. From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 11:58 AM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Cc: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit Hi Steven, We have written the check. Would you prefer that it be mailed? If so, what would be the proper mailing address? Hi Timmi, I hope all is well. I wanted to follow up with you regarding scheduling a meeting with members of our executive board and me to talk through the notices of violation, the conditional use permit, and the potential next steps given the use permit violations. Does later this month or early October work better for you? Let me know when you’re available, and we can coordinate a time to meet. Thank you in advance. Best, Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 11:37 AM Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Adam, Thanks for reaching out. Yes, the citation totals $350. Please make it payable to "City of San Luis Obispo". Thank you, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor 494 Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications -----Original Message----- From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 11:08 AM To: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Cc: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit Hi Adam, Thanks, John and Steve can help you with ensuring your payment is addressed correctly. Thank you, Timothea (Timmi) Tway Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 slocity.org -----Original Message----- From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 11:48 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit Hi Timmi, Thank you for your email. My apologies for the delayed response. I will follow up with you then. Regarding the fine given to our property by the city, who should we make the check payable to, and is the total amount still $350? Thank you in advance. Adam Wechsler Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity President | ΣΩ Chapter Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology 495 On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:33 PM Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> wrote: > > Adam, > > Thank you - > > Since there is some time before school is back in session, let’s revisit schedules at the beginning of September with a goal of meeting the last week of September or first week of October. > > I will send an email then. > > Thanks, > > Timothea (Timmi) Tway > Director of Community Development > Community Development > 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T > 805.781.7187 slocity.org -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2024 5:54 PM > To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> > Cc: Hanh, Hannah <hhanh@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John > <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> > Subject: Re: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit > > Hi Timmi, > > Thank you for your response and your assistance. Our executive board is more than happy to set up a meeting to discuss the notices of the violation, the conditional use permit, and a course of action we can take. With summer still in session, it may be difficult to meet due to scheduling conflicts. Are you available to meet sometime in September? > Our fall quarter begins September 23rd. Please let me know what dates and times may work. Thank you in advance, and I look forward to meeting with you. > > Best, > > Adam Wechsler > Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity > President | ΣΩ Chapter > Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 4:30 PM Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Adam, > > > > Thank you for reaching out. I have attached the documents you are requesting, and the CUP for the fraternity use is at the end of the packet attached. 496 > > > > As you will see in the notices that were provided, the City is > > requesting a meeting with the fraternity to talk through the notices > > of violation, as well as the conditional use permit, and the > > potential next steps given the violations of the use permit. Please > > let me know when you or other leadership from the fraternity are > > able to meet to discuss, > > > > Thank you! > > > > Timothea (Timmi) Tway > > Director of Community Development > > Community Development > > 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T > > 805.781.7187 slocity.org -----Original Message----- > > From: Adam Wechsler <aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com> > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 2:39 PM > > To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> > > Subject: 280 California Blvd - Conditional Use Permit > > > > > > > > This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Hi Timmi, > > > > My name is Adam Wechsler, and I am the President of Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity. I'm following up on my email from last week. One of our residences is 280 California Blvd. I have recently been informed that this property has received public complaints submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo for violating the Conditional Use Permit that allows us to operate. I have not directly received any notice of such complaints from surrounding residents or the City. I’m emailing to inquire whether you could provide me with information about these complaints and whether an appeal has been filed regarding our Conditional Use Permit. Can you please provide me with a copy of the Conditional Use Permit we have on file with the City as well? I’m aware that we have maintained our Conditional Use Permit for some time now. On behalf of my organization, we look forward to working with you and the City. Thank you in advance for your time and assistance, and I look forward to hearing from you. > > > > > > Adam Wechsler > > Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity > > President | ΣΩ Chapter > > Cal Poly San Luis Obispo | Psychology > > > > > 498 From:Dickel, Jason Sent:Thursday, October 3, 2024 9:06 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:Re: Frat presentation Yes sounds great. Thanks! Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Get Outlook for Android From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 8:48:41 AM To: Dickel, Jason <jdickel@slocity.org> Subject: Frat presentation Hi Jase, I’ve got a Sunday evening frat presentation scheduled for Oct. 27 th. Can I grab Perlette to come along with me for this? It’ll be 7:45pm to about 8:30/8:45 depending on questions and this one is on campus. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 500 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Thursday, October 3, 2024 8:39 AM To:Beta Theta Pi Subject:RE: SLOPD Presentation Hi Cole, Let’s go with the 27th. Would it be okay if I went first and took about 20 minutes? Thanks, Christine From: Beta Theta Pi <cpbeta.president@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 6:10 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: SLOPD Presentation Hi Christine, Thank you for being so patient as we finalized our schedule. We have chapter meetings on campus from 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM on Sundays. The next 2 meetings will be extremely busy with rush, would you be able to come on October 20th or 27th? Please let me know! Best, Cole Krueger Chapter President Beta Theta Pi Fraternity Epsilon Delta Chapter at California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) San Luis Obispo, California, United States Cell: + 1327 E Foothill Blvd San Luis Obispo, California 93405-1413 cpbeta.president@gmail.com On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 9:11 AM Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Cole, Thanks for getting back to me. The agenda is as follows: the City’s noise & unruly gathering ordinances, noise warnings & citations, safety enhancement zones, City party registration and repeat violations resulting in landlord citations. I can do this in about 15 minutes and would be able to answer questions from the members as well. 501 Thanks, Christine From: Beta Theta Pi <cpbeta.president@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2024 5:27 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: SLOPD Presentation This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Christine, Thank you for reaching out! As of now, we are still waiting on confirmation from the school for our chapter room reservation, but I would definitely be interested in having you as a presenter early this quarter. Would you be able to please provide an agenda and how much time you need so that I can plan accordingly? As soon as I get the confirmation I can let you know. Thank you! Best Regards, Cole Krueger Chapter President Beta Theta Pi Fraternity Epsilon Delta Chapter at California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) San Luis Obispo, California, United States Cell: + 1327 E Foothill Blvd San Luis Obispo, California 93405-1413 cpbeta.president@gmail.com On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 11:22 AM Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Cole, 502 I’m reaching out in hopes of getting on the Beta calendar for an early Fall quarter presentation to your organization. 1327 Foothill earned many citations last academic year and I’m hoping to get in front of your membership early to help share information, answer questions, dispel myths, to help set you all up for success. Could we set up a time for me and an officer to come to your chapter meeting in October? Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re- transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 505 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 4:04 PM To:Seth Herschel Murawsky Subject:RE: Quick meeting visits the week of Oct. 21st Thanks!! From: Seth Herschel Murawsky <shmuraws@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 3:57 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org>; Celeste Nicole Constancio <cconst02@calpoly.edu>; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Re: Quick meeting visits the week of Oct. 21st This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Christine, Yes, you can stop by USFC General on the 21st! We will be back in UU220 and will start around 7.15pm. Best, Seth Murawsky, M.Ed. pronouns he/him/his Why Do Pronouns Matter? Equity & Inclusion Lead Coordinator, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7267 Book a meeting with me here From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024 at 3:54 PM To: Celeste Nicole Constancio <cconst02@calpoly.edu>, Seth Herschel Murawsky <shmuraws@calpoly.edu>, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Quick meeting visits the week of Oct. 21st Hi everyone, May I pop into USFC, IFC and PHA the week of October 21st with Halloween safety enhancement reminders? I’m good with not being agendized and just rolling through for public comment, if that’s a thing for these meetings. Thanks! Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager 506 Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 507 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 3:12 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8382 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8382 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity event scheduled for 10/5/2024. Delta Sigma Phi advertised a "Dye Tourney and Pizza" fraternity event for rush recruitment at 589 Cuesta Drive, an R-1 zone. Fraternity operations and events are not permitted at this address. A link to the Instagram post is here: https://www.instagram.com/p/DAh8UofJuHt/ Location: 589 Cuesta Drive To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 4, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 508 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 3:08 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8381 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8381 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity event scheduled to be held by Cal Poly fraternity Delta Sigma Phi on 10/4/2024 and 10/6/2024. These events are not permitted in this residential zone. The events are advertised on their Instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/p/DAh8UofJuHt/ Location: 1684 Mill Street To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 4, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 509 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 3:03 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8380 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8380 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity rush event scheduled in one of Sigma Nu's unpermitted satellite fraternity houses at 1632 Fredericks Street on 10/6/2024 called "Satellite Showcase" from 6 p.m. - 10 p.m. This is an illegal use in an R-1 residential zone. The event was posted on Sigma Nu's fraternity Instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/p/DAg9QxWTnUe/?img_index=2 Location: 1632 Fredericks Street To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 4, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 510 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 2:50 PM To:Mezzapesa, John Subject:Ask SLO Notification of new Request #: 8378 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8378 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to Code Enforcement. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Illegal fraternity event scheduled to be held on 10/5/2024 at one of their unpermitted satellite fraternity houses at 1841 Slack Street, R-1 zone. The rush event is posted on Sigma Nu's Instagram page https://www.instagram.com/sigmanuslo/ Also, see photo of screen capture attached, with event addresses listed. Location: 1841 Slack Street Expected Close Date: October 4, 2024 Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 511 From:Hayley Townley < Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 1:21 PM To:Sheats, Steven Subject:Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Please also add Tyler Corsello - tyler@espondaassociates.org. Not sure if you are sending to emails or phone numbers :-) -- Tyler Corsello Director of Facilities and Operations (317) 876-1913 ext. 125 www.espondaassociates.org On Sep 30, 2024, at 3:10 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Gotcha. I have it on the calendar for now. Let me know either way so that I can reschedule if needed. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 3:09 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 They actually are the ones who need to be there to make decisions and hold them accountable. They work for Esponda Associate (the management of the fraternity) and that is who I actually lease the property to. They actually manage the tenants :-) I will send them an email! 512 On Sep 30, 2024, at 3:03 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Hayley, Neither of them were there. I do not have their contact so if you want to invite them, you are more than welcome. I’ll need a number to include them in the conference call if they won’t be in your office during that time. Thank you, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:09 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Hi Steve, I can make it at that time. I think we need at least one representative from the actual chapter, either Tyler Corsello or Corey Cohen from Esponda Associates. Were either of them involved in the conversation you had with the tenants? I just want to make sure they are included. Let me know and I will invite one or both. Putting you on my calendar. I’d also start looking at that trash pile - hahahahaha Hayley Townley Broker®/Owner COMET REALTY Friendly. Professional. Local. c. 805-440-9194 | t. 805-546-9925 | f. 805-546-9905 1110 California Blvd. Suite #C, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Hayley@CometRealty.com DRE #01042135 513 “We are not your ordinary real estate company.” On Sep 30, 2024, at 9:41 AM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Good morning Hayley, I hope you are doing well. Our team met with four of the tenants on Thursday and discussed the use permit and possible outcomes of the review. They were very respectful and cooperative during the discussion. My director (Timmy) has asked to do a call to discuss with you, the property representative, the use permit and possible outcomes of the hearing. It looks like our team will be available on Tuesday the 8th at 11:30am. Are you available at that time for a phone call? Thank you, Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sheats, Steven Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 8:19 AM To: Hayley Townley < Subject: RE: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Good morning Hayley, Thanks again for meeting with me yesterday. I went by the property afterwards and closed out the trash code case. At the end of the day I was able to speak with Tyler and he is looking up what could be done if the use permit was pulled/revoked as far as how you could go about renting that many rooms in a single residence. His preliminary look into it seems like you can’t have five or more separate leases. But he is going to contact our City Attorney’s Office to see how the zoning code should be interpreted should the property no longer have a use permit. It is also a new one for them as nobody has ever requested to remove a use permit of this nature. 514 The good news is, we have time to figure it all out and work it out with the remainder of the lease. I’m sure we’ll have some answers soon but wanted to let you know it’s already being looked into. Please also keep me posted on what you hear from the owner’s attorney. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 4:34 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Thanks Steven - looking forward to putting a face with a voice :-) On Jun 26, 2024, at 12:54 PM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Sounds good. I will be out and about so I’ll come by your office. See you then! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org <image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e- notifications 515 From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 12:34 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: Re: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 Let’s do July 9th at 2:30 - would like to meet you. I can come to your office, you can come to mine or we can get coffee. Hayley Townley, Broker Comet Realty 805-440-9194 iPhone | iTypos | iApologize On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:48 AM, Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Hayley, Thanks for reaching out. If you want to meet in person, July 9th would be the best day. If you want to just chat on the phone, any of those days work. Let me know what works best for you. Thanks! Steve Sheats Code Enforcement Officer Interim Code Enforcement Supervisor <image001.png> Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E ssheats@slocity.org T 805.783.7841 slocity.org 516 <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Hayley Townley < Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 5:18 PM To: Sheats, Steven <ssheats@slocity.org> Subject: 280 California #CODE-000074-2024 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond Hey Steven, I received your letter dated June 19th about the Fraternity Use Permit. Would love to have a conversation about this with you to see what, if anything, I can do to help. Here are some available times: Wednesday, July 3rd between 2-4 Tuesday, July 9th after 2pm Friday, July 12, anytime after 11am Please let me know if any of these times work. If not, we can figure something out. Actually looking forward to figuring this one out with your help. Hayley Townley Broker®/Owner COMET REALTY 517 Friendly. Professional. Local. c. 805-440-9194 | t. 805-546-9925 | f. 805-546- 9905 1110 California Blvd. Suite #C, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Hayley@CometRealty.com DRE #01042135 “We are not your ordinary real estate company.” 523 From:Wooten, Eric Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2024 8:06 AM To:Symens, Sadie Subject:FW: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Attachments:List of Notices Sent.pdf; Notices of Violations.pdf; Advisory Notices.pdf Here is the email from Mezzapesa about the missing letters. From: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 11:01 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org>; Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Attached are the responsive records for this request. It should be noted to the requestor that some of the Advisory Notices were not saved after being sent, so we do not have copies, but the attached list outlines all notices that were sent out. John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 From: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 9:13 AM To: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Thanks John! Can we tell the requester that there will be responsive records? From: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 9:11 AM To: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea 524 <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present I will have this done today. John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 From: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 8:40 AM To: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present John – what’s the status on this production? Thanks! From: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2024 1:25 PM To: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present I have asked my officers to get me the notices that were sent out as this effort was divided across my team. I expect to have everything by tomorrow and I will attempt to put it all together by end of day tomorrow. It will be completed by Friday at the latest. John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 525 From: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2024 12:20 PM To: Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Can we get an ETA on code enforcement records? From: Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 3:28 PM To: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Hi John, Could you please provide an ETA for the requested documents? Thank you, Lala Stowe pronouns she/her/hers Supervising Administrative Assistant Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E lstowe@slocity.org T 805.783.7870 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 2:46 PM To: Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org>; Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present Email search is complete and undergoing attorney review. Can we get an ETA on code enforcement records? Thanks! From: Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 12:53 PM To: Stowe, Lala <lstowe@slocity.org>; Wooten, Eric <ewooten@slocity.org> Cc: Curry, Krista <kcurry@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org>; City_Attorney <City_Attorney@slocity.org> Subject: Public Records Request - PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present 526 Hi All, Attached is a Public Records request from Kathie Walker for Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present, due by 09/22/24. If you are not able to meet that deadline, please advise. Otherwise, please send the requested responsive documents to cityclerk@slocity.org. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications June 13, 2024 Lindsey C Harn Trust 364 Pacific Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3847 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 556 Hathway Avenue. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 2 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo June 13, 2024 Jerry Lenthall 341 Montrose Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-1088 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 658 Graves Avenue. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 10 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo June 13, 2024 Dattani Tyash 1142 Montalban Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-2428 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1142 Montalban Street. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo June 13, 2024 Devin K Gallagher Trust 390 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-4218 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1725 Santa Barbara Avenue. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 3 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo June 13, 2024 Jerry Lenthall 341 Montrose Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-1088 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1928 Garfield Street. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 2 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo July 17, 2024 James C Johnson 930 Tulare St Pismo Beach, CA 93449-2459 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 251 Highland Dr, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-1001. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo July 17, 2024 Edward L Somogyi Trust 10300 San Marcos Rd Atascadero, CA 93420 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 260 Chaplin Dr, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-1933. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo July 17, 2024 Ed Attala Obispo Real Estate LLC 615 Evens Rd San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-8122 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 534 Hathway, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405-2422. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo July 17, 2024 Jennifer and Gregory Macdonell 14617 Chester Ave Saratoga, CA 95070-5670 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 568 Ellen Way, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Benjamin And Kelly Tulloch Family Trust PO Box 100 Pine Valley, CA 91962 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1990 McCollum, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Hodgsons, Paul W Trust 1601 Hansen Ln San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7969 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1704 Fredericks St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Hodgsons, Paul W Trust 1601 Hansen Ln San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7969 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1704 Fredericks St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Jesse K Bilsten Trust 2147 San Luis Dr San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 364 Grand Ave, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Michael C Whiteford Trust 4490 W Pozo Rd Santa Margarita, CA 93453-9617 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1841 Slack, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Scarry David C Trust 956 Walnut St #200 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-1707 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 526 Kentucky Ave Apartments 1,2,3,4, and 6, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Scarry David C Trust 956 Walnut St #200 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-1707 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 311 E Foothill Blvd, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Smullin, William D Trust 1419 Arbor Ave Los Altos, CA 94024 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1861 Hope St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 2 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Smullin, William D Trust 1419 Arbor Ave Los Altos, CA 94024 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1861 Hope St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 2 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Tri-M Rental Group LLC 257 Kathleen Ct Santa Maria, CA 93458-4953 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1744 McCollum St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 13, 2024 Donn Weipert Trust 1203 Palmer Park Blvd Colorado Springs, CO 80909 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 322 Hathway Ave, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 John and Gail Gray Properties LLC, 15240 E Lincoln Ave Parlier, CA 93648-9785 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 2149 Santa Ynez Ave, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Randall Heinzen 1670 Plum Orchard Ln Templeton, CA 93465-3613 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 212 Albert Dr, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 1 sanctioned event sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Real Value Wealth LLC, 2835 Forrester Dr, Los Angeles, CA 90064 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 2044 Loomis St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 3 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo May 7, 2024 Stewart Richard B Trust 867 McNeil Cir Woodland, CA 95695 Dear Property Owner, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department staff has been made aware of potential violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code located at 1441 Slack St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Within the City of San Luis Obispo, a fraternity or sorority requires a use permit when within the R-3 & R-4 zones and is not allowed within the R-1 & R-2 zones as described in section 17.10.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The city defines a Fraternity/Sorority as: 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. (SLOMC 17.156.014). In summary, a location meets the definition of a fraternity or sorority when it houses fraternity/sorority members AND holds a meeting or gathering hosted by a social or educational association. According to an annual report published by California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Campus (Cal Poly) as required by the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act (AB 524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code), 4 sanctioned events sponsored by a local social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly have been registered with Cal Poly at the above-mentioned location. Our department currently does not have any evidence showing that the above-mentioned location houses members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with Cal Poly. If, in the future, we are presented with evidence to the contrary, such as a list of recognized satellite houses provided by Cal Poly or staff verification of members residing at a location, the property in question may be found to be in violation of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as described above. This letter is to serve as an advisory notice so that potential violations may be avoided. If you have questions, please contact the Code Enforcement Division at (805) 594-8188 or code@slocity.org. Sincerely, Code Enforcement Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo We look forward to working with you to resolve these violations and would like to thank you for your efforts to maintain your property and to help preserve the safety and beauty of our community. If you have questions, please contact the undersigned Officer at (805) 783-7872 or nbuckley@slocity.org. Sincerely, ____________________________ Nick Buckley, Code Enforcement Officer Cc: Enclosures: Request for Directors Review, Table 2-1 APN Event Address Notice of Violation Sent Advisory Notice Sent 052-321-003 1441 Slack St Yes 052-324-017 1700 Fredericks Ave Yes 052-091-013 171 Orange Dr Yes 052-117-013 1820 Hope St Yes 052-124-017 2090 Hays St Yes 052-093-014 12 Hathway Ave Yes 052-091-014 1218 Bond St Yes 052-202-006 1229 Fredericks St Yes 052-193-003 124 Stenner St Yes 052-071-030 1243 Monte Vista Pl Yes 052-321-008 1525 Slack St Yes 052-116-006 250 Grand Ave Yes 052-321-023 278 Albert Dr Yes 052-322-011 299 Albert Dr Yes 052-072-007 301 Hathway Ave Yes 052-072-009 331 Hathway Ave Yes 052-082-008 1327 E Foothill Blvd Yes 052-231-001 1861 Hope St Yes 052-243-010 2149 Santa Ynez Ave Yes 052-224-017 1740 Fredericks St Yes 052-237-015 2044 Loomis St Yes 052-321-014 212 Albert Dr Yes 052-114-005 1744 McCollum St Yes 052-115-007 1841 Slack St Yes 052-122-015 1990 McCollum St Yes 052-141-076 311 E Foothill Blvd Yes 052-201-003 322 Hathaway Ave Yes 052-117-010 346 Grand Ave Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Apt 6 Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Apt 1 Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Apt 2 Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Apt 3 Yes 052-212-022 526 Kentucky St Apt 4 Yes 073-333-014 1010 Paseo De Caballo Yes 052-324-006 1621 McCollum St Yes 052-324-003 1661 McCollum St Yes 052-322-006 237 Albert Dr Yes 052-323-009 385 Chaplin Ln Yes 070-271-019 525 El Camino Real Yes 001-114-014 1130 Olive St Yes 001-113-005 1142 Montalban St Yes 003-552-008 1725 Santa Barbara Ave Yes 001-073-026 1928 Garfield St Yes 052-012-035 238 Foothill Blvd Yes 001-122-023 556 Hathaway Ave Yes 001-073-025 658 Graves Ave Yes 052-081-001 108 Crandall Wy Yes 052-071-008 1238 E Foothill Blvd Yes 052-071-030 ( 809-000-598)1241 Monte Vista Pl Yes 052-092-016 1254 Bond St Yes 052-092-012 191 Kentucky St Yes 052-072-005 281 Hathaway Ave Yes 052-033-052 618 Felton Wy Yes 534 From:Jan Marx < Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 4:13 PM To:McDonald, Whitney Subject:Re: A little background on Neighborhood Wellness Attachments:Neighborhood Wellness Report - Final All.pdf; RQN neighborhood specialist idea.doc This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi again, In the past RQN has been an active participant in formation of City policy regarding quality of life in the neighborhoods. Here are some documentary examples Jan On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 4:02 PM Jan Marx < wrote: Hi Whitney, I hope we can meet sometime later in the week for an hour or so regarding RQN and Neighborhood Wellness. Here is a City document that gives some context: https://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=3670&dbid=0&repo=CityClerk Best, Jan May 12, 2015 The Honorable Jan Marx Mayor City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dr. Gil Stork Superintendent/President Cuesta College Highway 1 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Dr. Jeffrey D. Armstrong President Cal Poly State University 1 Grand Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Dear Mayor Marx, Drs. Stork and Armstrong: On behalf of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group, we are pleased to present our final report for acceptance. The report contained with this letter is the result of 18 months of collaboration and discussions among residents, students, university and college staff, and City leadership. The action plans and timelines for implementation contained within this report are the result of a consensus agreement by all members of the working group, and these actions will result in improved neighborhood wellness in San Luis Obispo. All groups are ready to begin implementation, upon acceptance of this report. We welcome your suggestions to the report’s action items. The Student Community Liaison Committee is the body identified in this process to consider modifications during their oversight of this plan’s implementation. Thank you for the opportunity to serve the San Luis Obispo community! Sincerely, Keith B. Humphrey, Ph.D. Sandee L. McLaughlin Vice President for Student Affairs Vice President for Student Services & College Centers Cal Poly Cuesta College Enc. San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort FINAL REPORT Spring 2015 - Enhancing the quality of life for all residents - Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 3 PROCESS ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life .............................................. 5 OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success ....................................................................... 7 OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices ................................................................... 10 OBJECTIVE FOUR: Review enforcement best practices .......................................................................... 17 OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational & information efforts .................. 23 OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal ............................ 25 APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership ........................................................................................... 28 APPENDIX B: Council Agenda Report .................................................................................................... 29 APPENDIX C: Full Survey Report ........................................................................................................... 54 APPENDIX D: Matrix of All Action Items .............................................................................................. 70 APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations ...................................................................................... 76 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Report .................................................................. 79 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 3 OVERVIEW ith the focus of making San Luis Obispo an even more vibrant community for residents and students to reside in, community representatives, Cal Poly and Cuesta College administrators, students and San Luis Obispo city staff have worked side by side to coordinate their efforts through the Neighborhood Wellness/ Community Civility Effort. The effort was launched in May of 2013 with the support of the San Luis Obispo City Council, Cal Poly President Jeffrey Armstrong, and Cuesta College President/Superintendent Gil Stork. This initiative aimed to discuss the changing culture of neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo resulting from the shifts of owner-occupied households to the increase in rental units, specifically by student-aged individuals. Collectively, the working group has a vision of building “a community in which year-round residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding.” The unified goal of the working group has been to develop ideas for stakeholder consideration that are intended to “enhance the quality of life for all residents.” The group responded to the six objectives created by the San Luis Obispo City Council with subsequent recommendations, desired outcomes, implementation leads and partners, and timelines for implementation. The objectives are outlined below, and each is addressed thoroughly in this report.  Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life  Define stakeholders’ needs and success  Identify university/city best practices  Review enforcement best practices  Engage stakeholders: review current educational and information efforts  Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal W From the recommendations above and active collaboration within the working group, three overall themes emerged:  Increase communications from Cal Poly and Cuesta College  Develop responses through solution-oriented initiatives  Set in motion proactive measures to avoid repeating past mistakes and preventing new problems from occurring Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 4 PROCESS Beginning work in October of 2013, the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group conducted a thoughtful study of the objectives outlined by the San Luis Obispo City Council and created a process to efficiently move the community into action. Champions were assigned to each objective, and the subsequent 13 meetings, hosted by Cuesta College, were devoted to discussions of the objectives, led by the champions. Champions for the objectives are presented below: Note: Names in parentheses denote past working group members. During the robust discussions for each objective the entire working group offered feedback on the work of the champions and direction on how to proceed. Each group returned to conduct further studies based on the feedback and direction of this group. The champions provided recommendations to the working group in late 2014. Each of the recommendations were discussed and affirmed during the monthly meetings, which focused specifically on one particular objective. It is those recommendations that are presented in this report. OBJECTIVE ONE: Karen Adler, Julie Towery OBJECTIVE TWO: Katie Lichtig, Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Juventino Ortiz OBJECTIVE THREE: Derek Johnson, Stephanie Teaford (Justin Wellner, Betsy Kinsley) OBJECTIVE FOUR: Joe Arteaga, Steve Gesell, George Hughes, Chris Staley, Brenda Trobaugh OBJECTIVE FIVE: Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell), Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Kimberly Hampton, Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Christine Wallace OBJECTIVE SIX: Dr. Keith Humphrey, Sandee McLaughlin Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 5 Goal To define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance the quality of life for all residents, particularly associated in the timeframe around the start of Cal Poly’s fall term. OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life Champions Karen Adler, Community Julie Towery, Community Background Historically, there has been an increase in calls for service around the neighborhood areas adjacent to Cal Poly coinciding with start of the school year. This objective is set to define what short-term actions could lead to positive long-term effects during that timeframe. Short-term actions are also distributed among all objectives, thus are not exclusive to objective one. Recommendations  Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta College leaders, etc.  Investigate establishing Student Nighttime Auxiliary Patrol (S.N.A.P.) Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program  Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options  Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property-maintenance concerns and behavior issues  Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 6 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta leaders, etc. Allow neighbors to point out neighborhood issues Cal Poly Ongoing, began Summer of 2014 Investigate establishing S.N.A.P. Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program Increase the amount of support to assist with complaints and allow officers to do other police work City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options Decrease number of noise complaints City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property- maintenance concerns and behavior issues Hold repeat noise violators accountable City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods. Decrease properties that allow for high occupancy City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 7 OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success Champions Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College Katie Lichtig, City of San Luis Obispo Juventino Ortiz, Community Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly Goal For Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo to use the results of the community-wide survey to suggest efforts for implementation to address community-defined issues. Background The purpose of this objective is to identify the stakeholders’ needs and suggest solutions so that the outcomes reflect a desired environment for the community. To obtain a comprehensive assessment of the community’s needs and what success looked like, a communitywide survey was mailed in May of 2014. A total of 3, 774 surveys were completed and returned, physically and electronically. Of the completed surveys, 1,706 were from non- student residents, 1,783 were from individuals identifying themselves as either Cal Poly or Cuesta students, and 318 individuals did not associate themselves with any group. The full survey results and discussion is offered in Appendix C. Recommendations The assessment results provided a clearer picture of the stakeholder perceptions, which helped develop potential recommendations, such as:  Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three)  Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program  Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods  Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) update to achieve this objective  Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up  Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 8  Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three) Reduce noise disruptions Cal Poly and Cuesta College (programmatic) City of San Luis Obispo (enforcement) Fall 2015 Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program Insure that rental units comply with required minimum health and safety standards City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods (no specific recommendations discerned from the survey results) Improve student and community relationships Cal Poly Associated Student, Inc. (ASI) and Associate Students for Cuesta College (ASCC) Spring 2016 Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Address and decrease safety-related issues City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing per LUCE strategies Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up Increase the number of student-age residents to comply with the 24-hour ordinance City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) A reduction in the impacts of homelessness on the community City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 9 Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Reduce traffic-related issues in neighborhoods City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 10 OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices Champions Derek Johnson, City of San Luis Obispo Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner), Cal Poly Goal To identify best practices that can be undertaken by Cal Poly, in collaboration with the City of San Luis Obispo, to enhance positive interactions between students and permanent residents. Background Universities and colleges across the nation impact the communities in which they exist in both positive and negative ways. The impact of students in residential neighborhoods has prompted higher education institutions to share best practices that can lead to improvements in community relationships and mitigate negative impacts. The objective explored various programs and efforts undertaken by universities and colleges nationwide. The following recommendations could provide a framework for improving relations between student residents and permanent residents of San Luis Obispo. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 11 Recommendations To address student rental properties  Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office  Include expectations and responsibilities of living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. local ordinances)  The successful completion of a culminating test will result in a Preferred Renter Certification with potential benefits offered by landlords  Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions (University of Colorado, Boulder)  Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program. Students and landlords can work together for preferred renter/rental designation o Beautification Program: “Door Decal” or “Golden Arrow” for upkeep of property and meeting standards for appearance and safety o Student Affairs Awards: Awarded yearly to no-complaint housing (LaSalle University) o Preferred rental properties listed with the city o Request the release of judicial information to off campus entities (Plymouth State University) Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 12 To alleviate nighttime noise and to build compassion and understanding  Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)  Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20-minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer. This provides the students a way to minimize impacts on enforcement resources (University of Colorado, Boulder)  Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods (University of Colorado, Boulder)  Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods: o Student Neighborhood Liaisons: Block parties/events for networking. (University of Minnesota, Twin Cities & Towson University) o Neighborhood Helping Hands: Volunteerism for neighbor assistance (e.g. fruit picking, ladder needs, barn raising, etc.). Coordinate with campus departments to provide Learn by Doing experiences within neighborhoods for senior projects and other work-related majors such as horticulture, landscape architecture, construction management and others. o Peer-to-peer engagement for neighborhood policing; “Walk this Way Program” (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 13 To improve collaboration and understanding among students, non-students and city groups, and to increase engagement in problem solving  Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups. See Student Community Liaison Committee (SCLC), below.  Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus (Off- Campus Student Life; Cuesta College Student Life and Leadership; Student & Community Relations; Office of Neighborhood Life; Student Neighborhood Relations; Neighborhood University Relations and Neighbors; and Student Life and Leadership at Cuesta College) to: o Support all students, non-students, and permanent residents in the communities surrounding Cal Poly o Educate students about university policies and local ordinances o Continue to build and strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogue o Promote civic citizenship to create a positive quality of life for everyone living in the neighborhoods (Georgetown University) o Specific communications and strategies could include:  A 100 percent response policy for any time, any issue, by enforcing a prompt and meaningful response  The police provide a blueprint that lets students and neighbors know exactly what to expect when a community concern is registered with the university  The policy will establish a standard for reporting an incident (through a university helpline); clear steps that would be taken for follow-up with the student (through an updated sanction chart) and community members; and what data would be collected to create a metric to evaluate student success and outcomes (Georgetown University)  Sustained conflict resolution services such as “SLO Solutions,” a jointly sponsored citywide conflict-resolution program specifically designed to address student-neighbor issues and provide a means for constructive resolution. Since 2004, this program has used the services of Creative Mediation to resolve a variety of community disputes at no cost to those seeking mediation  Sustained SCLC effort. For more than 20 years, Cal Poly’s Associated Students, Inc. (ASI), Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC), and the city have served as leaders on the committee. It was established to further student and community communication and develop positive relationships Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 14  Neighborhood Concerns Phone Line: Neighbors can call in with concerns. Cal Poly and Cuesta College staff can recommend actions and contact students (Colorado University, Boulder)  Quarterly walkabouts and coffee sessions with city residents and representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city  One-hour walkabouts will be scheduled, every third month and will take place at various times throughout the neighborhoods surrounding the campus. During these walks they will explore student housing rentals, party atmosphere, traffic impacts and Greek housing  One-hour coffee sessions or “listening sessions” will be scheduled every third month, in the afternoon, at a local venue to discuss such topics as the Cal Poly Master Plan and vision for the future, diversity and inclusivity, students in the community, and year- end accomplishments and challenges  Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk” (University of Maryland).  Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing who generates letters signed by the university, police and city that outlines expectations. It is sent to the resident and landlord (University of Oregon) o Tagging for repeat offending or problem properties Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 15 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office Set expectations and responsibilities for students living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo Cal Poly Summer 2015 Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions Establish positive interaction with City Cal Poly ASI , ASCC, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program Rental properties that meet minimum health and safety standards Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students Raise awareness of the impacts of noise on neighborhood Cal Poly Spring 2016 Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20- minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer Fewer noise citations City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods Create positive interactions between students and year- round residents Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods Enhance a positive culture of peer-to-peer accountability in neighborhoods Cal Poly ASI Ongoing Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 16 Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups Improve collaboration and understanding among students, non- students and city groups SCLC Ongoing Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus to support students, non- students and permanent residents living in neighborhoods. Educate students about university policies and ordinances, strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogs Cal Poly & Cuesta College Fall 2015 Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk”. Positive engagement with law enforcement and decrease repeat offending properties City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing generates letter signed by university, police and city that outlines expectations sent to resident and landlord Cal Poly Fall 2015 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 17 Goal That Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo police departments consider implementing strategies to address community civility and quality-of-life matters. OBJECTIVE FOUR: Review enforcement best practices Champions Joe Arteaga, Cuesta College Steve Gesell, City of San Luis Obispo George Hughes, Cal Poly Chris Staley, City of San Luis Obispo Brenda Trobaugh, Cal Poly Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 18 Background In the past several years, both Cal Poly and the City of San Luis Obispo have engaged in numerous programs to address quality of life and community wellness. Both organizations have expanded professional staff dedicated to neighborhood wellness, created and modified ordinances, and implemented new programs to address pubic disorder and nuisance crimes including but not limited to: Amendments to the noise ordinance In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department made recommendations to the city council regarding changes to the existing noise ordinance to improve noise reduction efforts. The modifications included reducing the number of allowable warnings to one every six months and to hold residential property owners responsible for repeat noise violations. Many landlords have since added language to their lease and rental agreements with penalties levied to their tenants who receive noise violations. These modifications were accepted by city council and noise complaints were significantly reduced by 30 percent for the following year and have been maintained since (see Table 1 below). Table 1: Total noise party violations reported from 2009 to 2014. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Noise Violations 2584 2238 2013 1644 1672 1729 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Noise Party Violations Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 19 Unruly Gathering Ordinance In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department conducted research on Unruly Gathering Ordinances. After extensive research and outreach to the community and Cal Poly, an Unruly Gathering Ordinance was proposed and accepted by the city council. The ordinance was intended to prevent substantial disturbances on private property in a neighborhood. This included unlawful and disruptive behavior by large groups of people. On April 6, 2010, the city council adopted section SLMC 9.13.030 Prohibition of Unruly Gatherings. A violation of the Unruly Gathering Ordinance consists of hosting a gathering on private property that:  Involves 20 people or more; and  Involves unlawful conduct that creates a substantial disturbance in a significant segment of a neighborhood. “Unlawful conduct that results in a substantial disturbance can include such things as excessive noise, public drunkenness, serving alcohol to minors, fighting, urinating in public, crowds overflowing into yards, sidewalks, or streets, or similar unlawful behaviors.” Neighborhood Officer Program The San Luis Obispo Police Department initiated its Neighborhood Officer Program on December 1, 2013. The goal of the Neighborhood Officer Program is to quickly identify community issues, concerns, problems and crime trends that have long-term quality-of-life impacts on a particular neighborhood. The Neighborhood Officer Program allows for officers to coordinate resources to help solve these problems. This model of policing is both a philosophy and an organizational strategy that allows police and community residents to work closely together in new ways to solve problems associated with crime, fear of crime, social disorder and neighborhood decay. Attainable goals of this program include:  Maintain or increase public confidence in the Police Department  Decrease fear of crime  Listen to and address citizen concerns  Bring community resources together to solve problems  Impact specific crime problems  Reduce repetitive calls for service  Educate the public about its Police Department Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 20 Student Community Success Program In 2013 Cal Poly hired a full-time off-campus student life coordinator to be both proactive and reactive in supporting students and neighborhood residents with neighborhood wellness initiatives. Responsibilities of the position include:  Coordinate the resolution of off-campus conduct with university administration, city government and community members to find solutions for student’s problems or concerns  Assist in mediating and resolving student/community conflicts  Effect change in the social climate and relationships with specific responsibility of working with students and their neighbors within the local community  Implement training sessions, presentations, and educational programs regarding substance abuse, civic and social responsibility One goal of the program is to create a Student Community Success Program with the mission to help students be successful off campus and address community concerns. The program is intended to change and encourage inappropriate behavior through community and student meetings, workshops, leadership panels, and peer-mentoring opportunities. Cal Poly University Police Off-Campus Patrols By authority of the California Penal Code, the University Police Department has legal authority to exercise peace officer powers within a one-mile radius of the exterior boundaries of campus (see Appendix A). In 2014 Cal Poly hired two additional police officers to expand proactive patrols within the neighborhoods directly adjacent to campus. The focus of these patrols has been to proactively discourage and enforce public disorder crimes. Recommendations  City and Cal Poly officials should craft a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol  Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 21  City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness  Implement a keg registration program  Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population  Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus  Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations  Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 22 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation City and Cal Poly officials to craft a Memorandum of Understanding agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol within a one- mile radius Allows for coordination of resources to quickly respond to community concerns Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals To coordinate resources and obtain program goals City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness Change student culture related to neighborhood wellness SCLC Fall 2016, and with each annual report Implement a keg registration program A reduction in underage alcohol use and an accountability mechanism for persons who serve minors City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population Meet the needs of the community as population grows City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus Meet the needs of Cal Poly as student population grows Cal Poly Spring 2016 Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations To be able to patrol in neighborhoods adjacent to Cal Poly campus Addressed via MOU identified above Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Coordinate law enforcement outreach and problem solving efforts Cal Poly Fall 2018 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 23 Goal To engage stakeholders: review current educational and informational efforts. OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational & information efforts Champions Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell), Cuesta College Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College Kimberly Hampton, Cal Poly Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly Christine Wallace, City of San Luis Obispo Background This objective examines the methods, content and effectiveness of educational efforts put forward by Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, and student resident groups. The inventory of channels of communication was compiled by representatives of Cal Poly, Cuesta College, and the City of San Luis Obispo. Neighborhood wellness meeting attendees, Cal Poly and Cuesta College student focus groups were presented with the inventory. An additional student subcommittee met to discuss the effectiveness of current methods and content. Suggestions for outreach changes made during the presentations based on the content effectiveness are reflected in the recommendations of this report. Recommendations The recommendation is to collaboratively create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources. The communication plan should be reassessed annually to evaluate effectiveness and to ensure resources are not duplicated or wasted. Communications plan participants could consist of representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city. Suggestions for the Subcommittee  Produce a variety of impactful electronic and print media to educate residents on property maintenance standards, with a specific focus on repeat offenders in neighborhoods Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 24  Revive the Off-Campus Housing Guide (University of Colorado, Boulder)  Produce video for new Cuesta College students to view as part of the required online orientation on “how to be a good neighbor”  Produce “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone videos for www.respectslo.com (Linked to Cal Poly websites and campus television stations)  Cal Poly University Housing bulletin boards made available for “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone messaging  Cuesta College bulletin boards are made available for “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone messaging.  Create and play radio public service announcements on KCPR  Conduct annual presentations to Block P – Cal Poly Athletics  Develop an information distribution plan with off-campus housing providers and property management; request Safety Enhancement and good neighbor materials be posted  Housing resident assistant training to include off-campus impacts  Create better avenues of communication with Greek Life house owners  Produce Safety Enhancement Zone door hangers  Produce banners and sandwich boards to be displayed in the Cal Poly and Cuesta College university unions about community and neighborhood wellness issues  Produce table tents in Cal Poly University Union and Cuesta College cafeteria  Involve off-campus housing providers (property management companies, housing complex managers) in outreach efforts Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources Effectively inform the community on matters of neighborhood wellness City of San Luis Obispo Winter 2015 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 25 Goal The purpose of objective six of the report is to ensure that the plans developed in objectives one through five are implemented, assessed, and folded into the regular operations of the appropriate agency (for ongoing efforts). Additionally, the goal is to sustain regular communications between Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, residents and students. OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal Champions Dr. Keith Humphrey, Cal Poly Sandee McLaughlin, Cuesta College Background Neighborhood wellness issues in San Luis Obispo have historically been fragmented within each agency by implementing its own projects, causing confusion among year-round residents, and limiting the effectiveness of each individual effort. There is a unified desire among all constituencies in San Luis Obispo to see the quality of life improve in neighborhoods, and a structure to coordinate these efforts was missing. For almost three decades, the Student- Community Liaison Committee (SCLC) has brought the students of Cal Poly and Cuesta College together with city officials and residents for communication and discussion. This forum has been valuable to all parties, as any culture change related to neighborhood wellness rests with the students. Recommendations  Re-invest in the Student-Community Liaison Committee  The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented  Shift SCLC memberships  Host an annual town hall meeting Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 26 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Re-invest in the Student- Community Liaison Committee Become the coordinating body responsible for monitoring the recommendations, once adopted by the city council, Cal Poly and Cuesta College SCLC Fall 2015, ongoing The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented Recommend the appropriate changes, and produce an annual report on the state of neighborhood wellness in the City of San Luis Obispo SCLC Ongoing Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should be reevaluated to directly involve those individuals (by their position) most directly involved in neighborhood wellness SCLC Spring 2016 Host an annual town hall meeting Present their report to the community, receive feedback and suggestions from the broader San Luis Obispo community SCLC Spring 2016, ongoing Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 27 Appendix A: Working Group Membership Page 28 APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership Dr. Keith Humphrey, Co-Chair Cal Poly Sandee McLaughlin, Co-Chair Cuesta College Karen Adler Community Joe Arteaga Cuesta College Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell) Cuesta College Steve Gesell City of San Luis Obispo Dr. Anthony Gutierrez Cuesta College George Hughes Cal Poly Kimberly Hampton Cal Poly Derek Johnson City of San Luis Obispo Katie Lichtig City of San Luis Obispo Juventino Ortiz Community Chris Staley City of San Luis Obispo Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini) Cal Poly Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner) Cal Poly Julie Towery Community Brenda Trobaugh Cal Poly Christine Wallace City of San Luis Obispo Sharon Spatafora, Administrative Support Cuesta College Daisy Chavez, Copy Writing Cal Poly Yukie Murphy, Graphic Design & Editing Cal Poly Jo Ann Lloyd, Copy Editing Cal Poly counctL âqenòa pepopt leeting Date sl2U13 r.OË 1 FROM: Prepared By: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Steve Gesell, Chief of Police Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Christine'Wallace, Nei ghborhood Outreach Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION CIVILITY INITIATIVES OF NEIGHBORHOOD V/ELLNESS/COMMUNITY RECOMMENDATION 1. Consider the proposed Neighborhood V/ellness/Community Civility Effort and provide direction to staff; and 2. Direct staff to bring forth an amendment to the Safety Enhancement Zone Ordinance to include the start of the academic school year for Cal Poly State University. DISCUSSION Background Over the last several years, the City has experienced a significant increase in calls for service in August and September which coincides with the start of school for both Cuesta Community College and Cal Poly, respectively. The most notable increase coincides with the start of school for Cal Poly University. New students move into campus housing and participate in orientation programs while marry returning students move into ofÊcampus housing, either multi-unit apartment buildings or single family residential units. There has been a notable effort by Cal Poly to schedule activities and move-in times to campus housing to address community concerns. Though scheduled activities associated with orientation and housing are programmed through the late evening hours, students are opting out of participation. This results in large groups of students leaving the Cal Poly campus for the neighborhoods to explore the community and socialize. While many students do not engage in illegal activity, there is a considerable increase in the number of public order offenses such as noise violations, minor in possession of alcohol, urinating in public, open container and drunk in public arrests during this time. ln Septemb er 2012, it was estimated that over 2,000 student-aged revelers entered the neighborhood directly south of Cal Poly's campus on the first night of orientation. The composition of this crowd included Cal Poly and Cuesta students as well as guests from out of the area. The mass of people in the area presented a safety concern as they made the roadways impassable for police and f,tre vehicles, which impedes emergency response and hinders public safety oversight of the area. Alcohol consumption within large groups of people increases the potential for civil unrest and rioting. Riots are often the result of a number of variables including crowd size and the feeling of anonymity, as well as the inability of officials to prevent or address public order offenses early. San Luis Obispo has experienced two such riots, Poly Royal in 1990 and Mardi Gras in 2004, where 81 -1 attempts to address a loud party complaint and assist with medical calls for service quickly deteriorated into a large-scale riot resulting in multiple arrests, injuries to officers and citizens, and property damage. As demonstrated by the data below, the start of school time period (approximately 10 days each September) reveals a significant number of minor in possession of alcohol, drunk in public, open container, and urinating in public citations and arrests. In comparison, the first weekend of November shows an average number of calls and subsequent citations for the same infractions. For noise party calls alone, the start of school exhibits and 80o/o increase in calls for service. For minor in possession, the start of school exhibits a 9lo/o increase in citations given. Noise Party Citations Start of School'Wellness Effort Shortly after the start of the academic school year for Cal Poly in the fall of 2012, City staff met with Cal Poly Administration to discuss the adverse impacts of the start of school on the neighborhoods surrounding campus. As neighborhood wellness continues to be a Major City Goal, collaboration with Cal Poly and Cuesta College is vital to the success of building positive relationships between students and year-round residents. From this initial discussion and subsequent meetings, the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility concept was envisioned. The objective of these collaborative efforts is focused on neighborhood wellness and student academic success and is intended to create an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding which in turn is intended change attitudes and culture (Attachment 1). In January 2013 as part of the city's goal setting process Cal Poly President Jeff Armstrong submitted a letter (Attachment 2) to the City Council which underscored Cal Poly's desire to help create an even more remarkable place to live, work and learn. This letter acknowledged the linkages between neighborhood wellness and student success. Following that letter, staff from the Start of School Minor in Possession Drunk in Public Open Container Urinating in Public Unruly Gathering Social Host Noise Party Calls Noise Party Citations 9lts109-9121109 23 28 37 13 0 0 r73 23 9ltslr0-9126n0 74 25 45 29 0 2 9l 20 9ll4llt-9l2sltt 66 21 60 t4 0 0 r22 40 9l13lr2-91231t2 67 30 20 27 0 0 97 27 First Weekend of November Minor in Possession Drunk in Public Open Container Urinating in Public Unruly Gathering Social Host Noise Party Calls IIlsl09-rU8l09 0 2I 42 7 0 0 29 2 IIl4ltj-IU7lt0 4 I4 23 5 0 0 28 5 1 1 t3t 1 1 1 I l6lr 1 0 5 2 4 0 0 18 J t1/8/12-1111),1t2 J 10 ^J 4 0 0 18 6 B1 -2 City and Cal Poly began discussions to formulate a comprehensive strategy for a short, medium and long term effort. An overall goal emerged (outlined in Attachment 1), as follows: To enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. The preliminary objectives were def,rned by the Neighborhood'Wellness/Community Civility Effort and are as follows: 1) Define short-term actions that can be implemented to enhance quality of life for all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the start of school for Cal Poly; 2) Define stakeholders' needs and success; 3) Identify University/City best practices; 4) Review Enforcement best practices; 5) Engage stakeholders and review current education and information efforts. The Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort will actively seek feedback from residents and other stakeholders and make recommendations to Council, Cal Poly, and Cuesta College that support neighborhood wellness. Additionally, SLO Solutions/Creative Mediation is in the process of retaining an intern who will work directly with staff to assist the effort by identifying deliverables and strategizing methodology to produce desired outcomes consistent with the overall goal. ln addition, a Staft of School V/hite Paper was researched and written by Police Department staff in anticipation of this effort. The V/hite Paper (Attachment 3) identifies problems and issues related to the beginning of the collegiate school year with possible best practices to consider for mitigating the issues. This paper provides a summary of activity surrounding the start of school and initiatives that the Cal Poly and City have taken and can embrace in the future to help ameliorate the impacts of negative behaviors surrounding the start of school and other times of the year. Attachment 1 includes a graphic that outlines the connection between the working group and the existing Neighborhood Services Team. Ideas and strategies would be reviewed with the Neighborhood Services Team which is comprised of residents, neighborhood groups, student organizations, student representatives, and any interested member of the public before bringing forward these ideas to decision makers for decision and implementation. The proposal is to use the working group to research and implement council-approved strategies to enhance the quality of life for all residents with an emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. Strategies New student orientation also known as the Week of Welcome (V/OW) has traditionally taken place the week prior to the start of class. In the last several years, WOW has made changes to the schedule shifting from activities scheduled only during the week to activities engaging students during the week and through the weekencl. Aclditionally, Cal Poly Housing has made efforts at increasing the length of time activities take place into the evening in order to encourage students to 81 -3 remain engaged in positive activities on campus. For the upcoming academic school year, the WOW orientation program is being adjusted to include additional academic time and programming for parents of incoming and returning students. Finally, Cal Poly plans to create and staff an off- campus student life coordinator who will help with neighborhood wellness. These efforts are highlighted in correspondence from President Armstrong to Mayor and Council dated May 8, 2013 Attachment 4). In addition, Cal Poly University Police will be assisting the City's Police Department in response to off-campus violations presenting a health or safety risk that potentially involve groups of students. The Cal Poly Police role will focus on alcohol and noise violations and will be educational in nature. Cal Poly is also making plans to build more on-campus housing, though this may be six to ten years in the future. Furthermore, the Cal Poly Associated Students, Inc. (ASI) has introduced a campaign relating to campus culture dubbed "The Mustang Way." As new students arrive annually to Cal Poly and San Luis Obispo, the ASI Board is looking to message The Mustang 'Way principals of pride, responsibility and character as the foundation for student behaviors both on and off campus. Cuesta College is also an enthusiastic partner is the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort. Involvement in the effort is fully endorsed by Dr. Gil Stork, the President of Cuesta College Attachment 5). Safety Enhancem ent Zone In December 2004, Council enacted Chapter 9.22 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, which allows for the designation of safety enhancement zones with specific time frames. Violation of specified municipal code ordinances during the enacted safety enhancement zone time frames results in higher fines. In ll4ay 2010, Council approved the use of safety enhancement zones for Halloween, and St. Patrick's Day. As the data below demonstrates, the doubling of fines over the Halloween weekend has proven to be an effective deterrent. Noise calls and subsequent citations have been reduced by 50% since safety enhancement was enacted. Minor in possession and urinating in public citations are also on the decline, and most significantly open container citations with a 70o/o deuease. Staff believes the decrease in violations is the direct result of the educational and outreach efforts highlighting the increased fines that are in place and encouraging voluntary compliance Staff believes that the expansion of time zones to include the period of the start of school could have a similar impact on negative behaviors and potentially enhance students' potential for success. Minor in Possession Drunk in Public Open Container Urinating in Public Unruly Gathering Social Host Noise Party Calls Noise Party Citations 2009 6 20 34 10 0 0 43 t7 20r0 22 15 27 I9 0 0 42 9 20TI 30 10 20 9 0 0 46 7 2012 18 24 10 8 0 0 24 9 81 -4 Should Council concur and provide direction, Staff would prepare a proposed ordinance to amend Chapter 9.22 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to include the time period when school move in period begins and the first two weeks after the academic quarter commences. CONCURRENCES The Community Development and Fire Departments concur with this recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impacts were identified by forming the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort Any ordinance changes that result in increased fines are not likely to generate any significant revenue to offset the existing enforcement costs. ALTERNATIVES 1. Direct Staff to make no changes to the existing safety enhancementzone ordinance. 2. Provide additional direction or changes to the proposed collaborative effort between Cal Poly, Cuesta, and the City of San Luis Obispo. ATTACHMENTS Objectives for Start of School Neighborhood 'Wellness Effort January 8.2013 Cal Poly President Corresnondence White Paper Start of School Impacts May 8, 2013 Cal Poly President Correspondence May 9. 2013 Cuesta College Correspondence 1. 2. aJ. 4. 5. start 81 -5 Vision: Goals: Objectives: Att.achment 1 DRAFT City of San Luis Obispo-Cal Poly-Cuesta Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort M.ay 7,2013 A community in which year round residents and students actively collaborate to build community, communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding. To enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. I Define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance quality of life for all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the opening of the Cal Poly and Cuesta Campuses at the beginning of the school year. Tasks: Develop list of suggested short¡term actions (i.e. low-hanging fruit) to lessen the negative impacts on quality of life at this time of yeat. Assess feasibility of making changes Implement changes Define stakeholders' needs and success Tasks: Develop clear picture of various stakeholders' perceptions of situation (permanent residents, students, landlords) Understand and identify key events/ inflection points (e.g., start of school year, key holidays, events throughout the year, Graduation) Establish possible goals and measurements Define what success looks like. Develop working group structure and approach to engage neighborhood and student organizations. Identify University/City Best Practices Tasks: Research though International Town Gown Association Reach out to comparable university towns Gather research on key factors known to help nurture excellent Community-University relations and civility. Develop approaches based on best practices that deliver immediate results and phase in future actions over specified time period to achieve stated vision. Understand any barriers to enhancing the student code of conduct to include off-campus behavior. Review Enforcement Best Practices Tasks: Compare current ordinances and enforcement to best practices Review student j udiciary practices Review city-university jurisdictional rights and responsibilities 2. J 4 81 -6 4. Review university's disciplinary rights and practices Engage Stakeholders: Review Current Educational and Information Efforts Tasks: lnventory information channels to residents, students, and landlords Examine content and effectiveness of educational efforts by Cal Poly, Cuesta, City, student and resident groups Compare to identified best practices Develop Education-Communications Plan(s), including input on development of messages, advertising, and other outreach from residents as well as student leadership, campus administration, city leadership (staffand elected) and other stakeholders on problem definition and solutions. 6. Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal. 81 -7 Ne i g h bo r h o o d We l I ne s s C o m mu n it y Ci v i I it y Ef f o r t bl i c ln p u Re c o m m e n M¡ s s o n Re s e a rc h d e n tÌfy an d im p le m e n t Ca l Po ly Co u n c il an d Cu e s ta st ra te g ie s to en h a n c e th e qu a lìty of li fe fo r al l re s id e n ts wi th an em p h a s is on bu ìld n g po s itiv e re lê t o n s be tw e e n re s id e n tia l an d st u d e n t a g e d ne ig h b o rs th ro u g h a cu tu ra l sh ft Ìn so c ia l be h a v o rs Pu b l i c sl a lz o r3 Cu e s t a Co lle g e Pr e s i d e n t GE l m Ci t y Co u n c il Ca l Po l y Pr e s id e n t Co n s u lt Ad v is e an d tü t Æ î; ë G f f i c{ l Á df f i Ci ty St â C¿ l Po ly Ho u s in g Ca l Po ly AS I Ne i g h b o r h o o d Se r v ic e s Te a m Ca l Po ly St u d e n ts Cu e sta St u d e n ts Re s id e n ts Rq N Ne ig h b o rh o o d Gr o u p s Á- R @ Ca l Po ly C it y Cu e s t a Wo r k in g Gr o u p C¡ ty Ma n g e r Ð cå l Po ly St u d e n t AS t Câ po ly Af fã ir s la i Po lV Po llce Pr e s rd e n t C¡ r P o r y Fi re De p a r tm e n t Pu b lic Wo rk s f f i cå l Po ly Pr e s id e n t s Po lic e De p a rtm e n t Co m m u n ty De v e lo p m e n t De p a rtm e n t Cu e sta Co lle g St u d e n t L¡ fe Le e d e rsh p Cu e sta Co lle g e Vi c e Pr e s id e n t St u d e n t Se ru c e s Attachment 2CerPoLY SAN LUIS OBISPO January 8,2013 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT Mayor Jan Howell Marx and Members of the City Council City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Re: City goal-setting and budget process for 2013-15 Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members: As you undertake the important process of establishing the city's major goals for the 2013-15 cycle, I want to underscore Cal Poly's desire to help you create an even more remarkable place to live, work and, of course, to leam. I note that two of the city's top 2011-13 major goals - Economic Development and Neighborhood Wellness - were especially relevant to Cal Poly's mission, and I encourage you to retain these as major goals for 2013-15. While I believe Cal Poly has made tangible contributions toward these two goals, my colleagues and I all agree that we can be even more helpful in these areas. Improvements would be helpful to all who live here, of course, but they also have a direct bearing on our primary focus as a university - the success of Cal Poly students. The Economic Development goal specif,rcally included a desire for expanded collaboration with Cal Poly. In the last two years, with encouragement and support from the County and the City of San Luis Obispo, as well as elected offrcials and civic leaders throughout the region, Cal Poly has opened the Tech Park and established both the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship and the Small Business Development Center for Innovation. Additionally, a very focused partnership involving city officials, local business leaders and Cal Poly gave birth to the SLO HotHouse business incubator. We are continuing to look at how Cal Poly can be more effective at promoting partnerships with business, industry and government to promote economic development tfuoughout the region and look forward to what we can contribute to the city's efforts should economic development remain a major goal. While our core mission is educating students enrolled in our degree programs, we recognizethat economic opportunity, intercollegiate athletics and performing and CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93407-1OOO 805-756.6000 PHONE PRESIDENTSOFFICE@CALPOLY.EDU 805-756.7729 FAX www.cALpoLy.EDU 805-756'1'72e FAx 81 - 9 rrol z At.tachment 2 Mayor Jan Flowell Marx and Members of the City Council Page2 January 8,20)3 visual arts enhance our community for residents and visitors. We also know that as we expand partnerships, we are creating more opportunities for our students to interact with and learn from some of the region's fìnest minds. With regard to Neighborhood'Wellness, improvements are vital not only as a matter of respecting our neighbors, but they also are important to our students' success, as their leanring is done best in a safe, welcoming and respectful environment. There has been some success regarding code compliance and overall reductions in noise complaints, and I believe it has been the result of a combination of education and enforcement efforts. The council deserves credit for its leadership in approving tougher fines and encouraging stricter code compliance, efforts that Cal Poly publicly supported at a September 2009 city workshop. On the education front, our students, on their own initiative, developed The Mustang Way, a set ofprinciplestoguidestudentdecisionmaking@.Additionally,ourStudent Affairs divisiori implemented an educational program about the dangers of alcohol abuse called Aware Awake Alive Neighborhood Wellness is a rich concept, and, of course, is about more than code enforcement and noise complaints. V/orking together to adclress Neighborhood Wellness in a holistic way, \rye can do even more to continue to improve the quality of life for all residents, including the thousands of residents who are students at Cal Poly and Cuesta. In urging you to retain and expand Neighborhood'Wellness as an initiative, Cal Poly pledges to be an active, constructive partner. Keith Humphrey, our new vice president for student affairs, is eager to assist; ASI President Katie Morrow affirms the same commitment to help in the work ahead. While I mention these two important Cal Poly leaders, please know that all of us at Cal Poly are committed to assisting the city attain its goals, As our students wrote in The Mustang'Way, "'We are one community. 'We accept responsibility." They speak for all of us at Cal Poly. Thank you for the opportunity to share Cal Poly's perspective with you. And thank for your leadership in addressing these complex, challenging issues. Sincerely, o. Jeffrey D. Armstrong President 81 -10 Attachment 3 ctty oF sân Luls oBrspo Evaluating the start of school move in weêk, addressing neighborhood impacts and otential solutions City of San Luis Obispo White Paper Steve Gesell, Chief of Police Chris Staley, Police Captain Jeff Smith, Police Lieutenant SUMMARY During the past several years, the San Luis Obispo Police Department has seen an increase in the number of students congregating in the neighborhoods surrounding the Cal Poly campus during the start of school, prior to starting the fall quarter. The greatest impact has been during the evening and early morning hours when thousands of students enter these neighborhoods causing traffic congestion, create excessive noise, and participate in parties which result in physical assaults, alcohol related problems, acts of vandalism and other adverse behaviors detrimental to the neighborhoods. Many of the violations involving alcohol include minors in possession, open containers, drunk in public and social host violations. As a result, the San Luis Obispo Police Department has had to significantly increase the number of officers deployed during this time. The purpose of this paper is to give a summary of the problems associated with orientation week, review what the City of Chico and the Santa Barbara County Sheriff s Department are doing regarding similar events and make recommendations to address issues related to orientation week. SUMMARY OF ORIENTATION WEEK AND RELATED PROBLEMS Orientation week at Cal Poly is the time period which allows new and retuming students to move-in to their college residence and begin preparing for the upcoming fall class schedule. During this time period, there are University programs and activities that occupy the students day and evening until approximately midnight, but there is also a great deal of free time for the students. This free time gives college students the opportunity to take care of personal business, reconnect with friends and for many new students become familiar with their nervv community. During the evening and early morning hours alarge number of students use their free time to go off campus and into the neighborhoods which becomes a large social event. The majority of these students are well behaved and do not commit any violations of the law. Many of the issues during this time (i.e. excessive noise, traffic congestion) are a direct result of the vast number of students in the neighborhoods. It is often difficult for law enforcement officers to address marry of these issues when there is no clear violation of law. Violations involving noise associated with a specific address, drunkenness, assaults, open alcohol containers and alcohol in the possession of a minor are problems that law enforcement officer can clearly take enforcement action. Many of the violations involving alcohol include minors in possession, open containers, drunk in public and social host violations. Alcohol related problems during orientation week have also had a significant impact on local hospital emergency rooms. During this time, they experience a significant increase in the number of students being admitted to the emergency room for excessive alcohol consumption and injuries related to assaults. While individuals are highly encouraged to seek medical attention, the desire is to find ways to reduce the number that need such attention. In considering what course of action can or should be taken during orientation week, evaluation of current enforcement measures must take place but also engage the student population to change the culture to value the importance of neighborhood wellness. While University life becomes part of their identity, there needs to be a prevailing realization that when living in the surrounding off campus community, they are also residents with a committed interest for the welfare of the City of San Luis Obispo. As the City of San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly State University evaluate measures to change the culture, this paper will explore opportunities to modify city ordinances, improve enforcement in partnership with the Cal Poly Police Department, analyze educational and programmatic opportunities, and increase involvement with Student Rights and Responsibility. The key being a shift in the student culture and bring a greater understanding to the importance of "community" in San Luis Obispo. BACKGROUND Cal Poly's orientation week is the fall move-in prior to classes starting and consists of a number of programs for new and returning students. New students attend orientation programs hosted by on-campus housing and by the V/eek of 'Welcome program (V/OW). Second-year students are allowed to move in to on-campus housing during this time period and many students who live in off campus rental housing also move in or have akeady occupied their housing. Students attending Cuesta College, who live in the city, have already moved into their housing by this time as Cuesta begins classes in mid-August. In 2010, the San Luis Obispo Police Department did a comparison of activity during Fall Move- in period 2009 to 2010. After an increase in the level of alcohol and party related violations occurred during move-in period in 2009, Cal Poly reviewed its move-in and orientation schedules in an effort to decrease problems associated with the return of students. After evaluating the process and receiving input from stakeholders, the university made a shift in the move-in date for new and second-year students in 2010. In2009, students moved into on-campus housing on the Saturday two weekends before the start of classes. tn 2010, Cal Poly shifted on-campus move-in to Monday, one week before classes began. The shift in the move-in date eliminated a full weekend where students would not be participating in planned orientation week activities. In 2010, new students were immediately engaged in orientation programs that lasted through Sunday evening, with classes beginning on Monday. Also in 2010, Cal Poly made multiple presentations to new students during orientation regarding the risks associated with alcohol use and also emphasized students' responsibility to be good neighbors. Students were given in-depth information about applicable laws and City ordinances and discussion sessions followed. ln addition to Cal Poly staff shifting of move-in date for new and second-year students, the City Council modified an existing noise ordinance and enacted a new unruly gathering ordinance, which took effect in the spring of 2010. The new ordinances reduced the required number of warnings before issuing a citation and contained provisions for fining property owners for repeat violations. ln summary the combined tactics of changing the move-in schedule, increasing the information efforts and strengthening the noise ordinance appeared to have an immediate effect in reducing certain problems (such as noise violations) during the fall move-in period. Police Department staff remained concemed about the overall increase in the level of social activity and alcohol- related problems, especially the increased numbers of out-of-town partiers. Since the completion of this comparison, the San Luis Obispo Police Department has continued to experience many of the same issues related to the fall move-in period. In looking at a comparison in the number of violations occurring during orientation week two years prior to the 2009-2010 comparison through the 2012 orientation week, there is very little change over the six year period. The chart below includes disturbance advisement card (DACs), noise violations, minors in possession of alcohol (MIP), open containers and arrests. With the exception of DACs and arrests the number of violations being captured has remained consistent. The reduction in the number of DACs is primarily based on the changes in policy related to residences being placed on the "no warning list". Once a property has been added to the "no warning list" they are no longer eligible to receive a DAC. V/hen dispatch receives a complaint at a property on the "no warning list", officers respond to the complaint and issue a citation if there is a violation. TITLE 5 - STANDARDS FOR STUDENT CONDUCT Title 5 is a California Code of Regulations that is the basis for which student discipline for the entire California State University system. Student behavior that is not consistent with the Orientation Week Violations t20 100 cotr80( ì60o o, o 40 lz 20 0 DACs Noise Violations MIP Open Containers Arrests 2007 32 80 6 4 30 r 2008 46 82 47 t7 88 r 2009 50 100 22 15 45 2070 27 82 61 16 98 20tL 24 79 52 9 74 t20t2 28 78 64 L2 99 Student Conduct Code is addressed through an educational process that is designed to promote safety and good citizenship and, when necessary, impose appropriate consequences. The standards for student conduct are based on the Campus Community Values: The University is committed to maintaining a safe and healthy living and learning environment þr students, faculty, and staff. Each member of the campus community should choose behaviors that contribute toward this end. Students are expected to be good citizens and engage in responsible behaviors that reflect well upon their university, to be civil to one another and to others in the campus community, and contribute positively to student and university life. When applying Title 5, Cal Poly looks at violations of student conduct primarily when it impacts the campus community and the health, wellness and academic success of students. Under section (20Xd) of Title 5 the code states, "Conduct that threatens the safety or security of the campus community, or substantially disrupts the functions or operation of the University is within the jurisdiction of this Article regardless of whether it occurs on or off campus." SAFETY ENHANCEMENT ZONE ORDINANCE Background ln December2004 the Council enacted Chapter 9.22 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. This Chapter created a process to designate a geographic area in the City as a safety enhancement zone during specific dates/times based upon a finding by the City Council that such a designation is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of San Luis Obispo. Violations of the following Municipal Code ordinances during the enactment of a safety enhancement zone result in higher fines than violations when a safety enhancement zone is not in effect: Chapter 9.04 Chapter 9.05 Chapter 9.12 Chapter 9.16 Chapter 9.20 Possession or consumption of alcohol in public Hosting a gathering with minors consuming or possessing alcohol Noise control Dangerous and deadly weapons Urinating in public ln Septemb er of 2009, staff presented several strategies to reduce neighborhood noise and party disturbances and requested the Council provide direction to staff regarding the proposed strategies. During this study session, staff presented the need to amend the safety enhancement zone ordinance to update the fine structure. Staff also requested the Council provide direction regarding enacting a safety enhancement zone during other times of the year, such as Halloween and St. Patrick's Day, in order to deter increasingly disruptive behavior. The Council directed staff to return with amendments to the ordinance and with proposed dates for the enactment of the safety enhancement zone ordinance. Staff recommended the designation of citywide safety enhancement zone, rather than the designated geographic areas, and to include the periods of time encompassing Halloween and St. Patrick's Day. Staff further recommended that when Halloween falls on or near a weekend (Thursday through Sunday), the citywide safety enhancement zone designation encompass the entire weekend in order to deter multi-night celebrations. Recommendations submitted by staff were adopted by Council. Fines during safety enhancement are doubled, up to $1,000. For example a first noise violation which is regularly $350 would result in a fine of $700. Halloween and St. Patrick's Day remain busy events in the City of San Luis Obispo. The San Luis Obispo Police Department has noticed a decrease in the number of parties hosted by college students and the number of open alcohol containers violations in the neighborhoods surrounding the Cal Poly campus since the enactment of the Safety EnhancementZone Ordinance. The chart below was recently included in a Council Memorandum which highlights some of the posifive impacts the current Noise Ordinance and Safety EnhancementZone Ordinance. Noise-Party Calls o(¡' 5 o.tl o J o ctz 3s0 300 2s0 200 150 100 50 0 Trend Jot'*u"."n-";-rf*gf ."¡./sf -/".. Process to Change Current Ordinance Staff would need to complete a Council Agenda Report with recommendations to amend the Safety Enhancement Zone Ordinance to include the time periods encompassing Orientation week. The specifics of how to design a revised ordinance would need to be considered during ordinance development. NEIGHBORIIOOD OUTREACH MANAGER Currently the San Luis Obispo Police Department employs a Neighborhood Outreach Manager. One of the main functions of this position is neighborhood enhancement and improves quality of life in the neighborhoods. Listed below are some of the responsibilities associated with this position. Administers and supervises noise violation programs with an emphasis on education and outreach to the neighborhood groups and the consistently changing college age population. Plans, organizes, coordinates, supports and supervises the work of assigned SNAP staff; trains staff in work procedures; participates in selection processes and evaluates the work of assigned staff. Fosters cooperative working relationships among the City, state university, community college, business, resident and other community groups. Represents the City at avariety of public and private group meetings to increase partnership, transparency and information exchange; provides ongoing assistance and mentoring to neighborhood groups and leaders as needs arise. Facilitates programs for citizens designed to achieve a greater level of participant understanding of policing in San Luis Obispo. Conducts statistical crime analyses using the Department's Computer-Aided Dispatch and Records Management System; uses the datato evaluate and identify chronic problem areas, and collaborates with enforcement personnel to gain compliance. Collaborates with City Departments to develop and implement education and outreach programs regarding noise ordinance compliance. Prepares and produces informational materials for various media. Oversees marketing strategies focusing on crime prevention and organizational branding to include the management of a contract with a marketing firm to reach targeted demographics. Provide support in coordinating public meetings and special events. Implement public information strategies to gain voluntary compliance of municipal codes. The Neighborhood Outreach Manager regularly conducts meetings with residents, university off,rcials, student leaders, Greek afhliated organizations and off-campus living facilities. In addition, they participate in four to five campus fairs which provide noise and zone enhancement information to students. These outreach programs can be expanded to include more information regarding neighborhood wellness for student living off campus. CITY POLICE - UNIVERSITY POLICY RELATIONS Santa Barbara County Isla Vista area and City of Chico are communities similar to San Luis Obispo, with a large student based population. Although they do not experience student related problems during their fall orientation week, they do experience similar problems throughout the year such as large parties, excessive noise, large student gatherings, assaults and alcohol violations. During Chico and Santa Barbara's academic school year additional law enforcement is needed to address the added number of violations committed in the community by college students. City of Chico Ilrl2006, the City of Chico and California State University, Chico established a MOU for a joint law enforcement operational protocol between the City of Chico Police Department and California State University, Chico Police Department. Attached to this document is a copy of the agreement and operational protocol. In summary the MOU and operational protocol established the following: o Geographical boundaries for jurisdictional authority and responsibility o University Police responding as the primary agency for recognized off campus fraternities and sororities o Handling of criminal investigations o Responding of on-view incidents off campus o Providing crime reports and records Off,rcer involved shooting o Dispatch transfer of emergency and non-emergency calls o Management of civil disorders o Incident command at major incidents o Location of crimes and responsibilities of initiating officer County of Santa Barbara In 2010, the County of Santa Barbara and University of Califomia, Santa Barbara established a MOU governing a joint operation for the Isla Vista Foot Patrol Unit. Attached to this document is a copy of the cooperative agreement and MOU. The Isla Vista Foot Patrol is a cooperative agreement between the County of Santa Barbara and the University of California to provide Community Oriented Policing to the community of Isla Vista in which officers leave their vehicles to perform a "foot patrol" to become better established by the community. [n summary the MOU and cooperative agreement established the following: o Law Enforcement staffing committed by the Sheriff s Office and University Police Governing Policies Areas of responsibility Equipment Program Expenses Chain of Command The law enforcement agencies included in these MOU agreements felt the combined efforts of University Police and local law enforcement were beneficial in addressing off campus violations related to high student residential population. The greatest benefits being the off campus presence and involvement of University Police with student related violations of the law and the potential involvement of Student Judicial Affairs. RECOMMENDATIONS Complete a Council Agenda Report with recommendations to change the Safety EnhancementZone Ordinance to include the period of Orientation Week. Continue discussions with University Officials and University Police to further evaluate the possibility of a MOU agreement between the City and University regarding police operational protocol off campus. Explore additional educational opportunities with the Cal Poly and Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness. o a Attachment 4 CerPoLY SAN LUIS OBISPO lll/'ay 8,2013 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT Mayor Jan Howell Marx and Members of the City Council City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 Re: Neighborhood Wellness Initiative Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members: In my January 8,2013,letter to you about the city's major goals for 2013-15 (copy attached), I underscored Cal Poly's commitment to be an unwavering partner in your efforts to enhance San Luis Obispo's quality of life. Now, as you begin to look at specific Neighborhood V/ellness initiatives,I thought it might be helpful to share with you several corresponding efforts that we have under way at Cal Poly. These initiatives have been undertaken with a particular focus on the beginning of the academic year. Under the leadership of Keith Humphrey, our new Vice President for Student Affairs, Cal Poly has put into place some changes aimed at ensuring a smooth start of the academic year, For September 2013, we have adjusted the Week of 'Welcome schedule to include greater emphasis on academics and a commitment to being good neighbors and citizens. Additionally, each year for the next several years, the Week of Welcome will add programming for parents of new students as well as programming for retuming students, agun with a goal of helping students strike an appropriate balance between their studies and their social life and to ensure that they focus on the primary objective of their time at Cal Poly - successful completion of their degree. As has been noted in local news coverage, Cal Poly is already implementing more proactive procedures to respond to off-campus violations that present a health or safety risk to students. We are particularly focused on responding to incidents where students have been formally charged with violations. In early 2014, we expect to have reconfigured some staff assignments to provide for an off- campus student life coordinator who will help facilitate neighborhood wellness. This person will be tasked with helping students contribute positively to their neighborhoods and provide appropriate responses to off-campus behaviors that are not healthy or safe. The coordinator will work closely with city staff as well as with student leaders and Cal Poly administrators. CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93407-1OOO 80s-7s6-6000 pHoNE pRESrDENrsoFFrcE@cALpoLy.EDU sos-7s6-1.tze FAx B 1 - 19WWW,CALPOLY.EDU I Attachment 4 Mayor Jan Howell Marx and Members of the City Council Page2 May 8,2013 We are currently finalizing plans for expanding university housing over the next six to ten years. Our plan is to complete an initial expansion of student housing, perhaps as early as Fall 2018, that would add approximately 1,400 beds to bring our existing stock to approximately 8,300 beds. Our goal is to steadily increase our supply of university housing for students because they tend to achieve more academic and social success the longer they live in university housing. I also want to mention againtwo other efforts. I repeat them because they add an important dimension to our efforts and reflect the care and concern of our students and parents: launched by our student-athletes, then subsequently captured the attention of our ASI student leaders who brought it forward to the entire campus. I am particularly proud our student leaders for their initiative on The Mustang Way. I believe it derhonstrates their sincerity and commitment to improving the climate on and off campus for everybody. For more on The Mustang V/ay, please go to http:i/goo,sl/37hEx . Carson Starkey, continues to be very helpful in our efforts to educate students about the dangers of alcohol abuse. For more, please go to http://studentaffairs- test. calpoly. edt/conlent/awareawakealive. As I noted in my January letter, we all believe that neighborhood wellness is a richer concept than simply code enforcement and reductions in noise complaints. It is our goal that by working with you and with Cuesta College, we can address neighborhood wellness in a holistic way that benefits all residents, including the thousands of residents who are students at Cal Poly and Cuesta. Thank you for the opportunity to share Cal Poly's perspective with you, and thank you for your leadership in addressing these complex, challenging issues. Sincerel Armstrong President Attachment G. Stork Cal Poly Vice Presidents ec: 81 -20 CUESIA COLLECE Attachment 5 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY COMMUNI-TY COLLECE DIs]'I{ICT Th¡u¡an^d¡ o'f Su¿c¿*¡ ftoriø May 9, 2013 Mayor Jan Howell Marx and Members of the City Council City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401-3249 Re: Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort I welcome the opportunity to write this letter in support of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort with the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly, and Cuesta College. Over the past 23 years, Cuesta College administrators and student leaders have participated in and benefited from the partnership with the City of San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly in the Student Community Liaison Committee. Our newly-adopted mission statement supports "preparing students to become engaged citizens in our increasingly complex communities and world." We bring student attention to their immediate community of San Luis Obispo through a number of college initiatives: ordinances during the annualfall Connect@Cuesta orientation event for new students. with free community mediation services addressing issues ranging from roommate disputes to landlord and neighbor issues. of safety enhancement zones throughout the year. 1a1.''2013 semester which will include good neighbor policy information. their families highlighting good neighbor relationships. One of the main reasons that San Luis Obispo is such an inviting community in which to live, work, and learn, is that we continue to place the quality of life as a priority. This is a value that we continue to instill in our studenþcitizens as they prepare to enhance the community in which they choose to make their home. Sincerely, Gilbert H. Stork, Ed.D. SuperintendenUPresident SAN LUIS OBISPo Campus P.0. Box 8106, San Luis 0bispo, CA 93403-8106 (805) 546-3100 NORTH COUNTY Campus 2800 Buena Vista Drive, Paso Robles, CA 93446 (805) 591-6200 81 -2 s-:'{r:w r oo,r nrcrcleo rntt Page intentional ly left blank. B1 -22 Goodwin, Heather R ÏV fVlAY 2 0 20t3 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Grimes, Maeve Monday, May 20,2013 L:17 PM Goodwin, Heather CTTY RK FW: Item 81, Consideration of Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Initiatives Neighborhood Wellness-Civility.doc Heather, please distribute this as Agenda Correspondence for ltem 8L. AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE Thank you, rràev€r kenneòy çRrmes City Clerk ctty oll sÀn tuts oBtspo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. phone;, (805) 781-7102 emÀtL, merimes@slocitv.org From: Sandra Rowley Imailto:macsar99@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 11:52 AM To: Max, Jan; Ashbaugh, John; Smith, Kathy; Carpenter, Dan Cc: Lichtig, Katie; Grimes, Maeve Subject: Item 81, Consideration of Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Initiatives Attached is RQN's letter regarding ltem B1, Consideration of Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility lnitiatives. 1 Residents for Suality Nelghborhoods P.O. Box 12604 . San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 May 20,2OL3 RE: ltem BL, Consideration of Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility lnitiatives Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the Council First of all, the Board and members of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods sincerely thank SLOPD asthe lead department aswell as allotherCitystaff who, in conjunction with President Armstrong and the Cal Poly administration, have made these cooperative efforts possible. We are cautiously optimistic that such efforts will, in fact, lead to the types of quality neighborhoods experienced by some of our residents, but only dreamed of by others. The RQN Board strongly supports the addition of move-in and the beginning two weeks of school to our Safety Enhancement Zones, thus doubling fines for this time period. We, also, strongly support the concept of Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility and applaud Cal Poly's efforts to instill a sense of community and civic mindedness in new and returning students. Their efforts have the ability to dramatically improve the livability of neighborhoods and to add to the "downtown experience." Review of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility proposal and the chart on page BL-8, show the inclusion of a wide range of City, College and University participants, including students, as members of the proposed Working Group. However, there are no designated positions for the City's permanent residents depicted. Residents, along with City staff, Cuesta and Cal Poly students, are only involved in this process as part of the bimonthly Neighborhood Services Team - to consult and advise (page #81-8). We propose 2-3 positions be added to the Working Group for permanent residents and that they represent heavily impacted neighborhoods such as Alta Vista, Monterey Heights and Laguna. As an aside, RQN deeply appreciates the decision by the Cal Poly President to designate an off- campus student life coordinator to help facilitate neighborhood wellness. We hope that Council members and City staff will provide this individual with the requisite contact information for the City's residents' groups so that the wealth of information and experience possessed by members ofthese groups can be shared. RQN recommends the following 1-. Support of the proposed addition to the Safety Enhancement Zones Ordinance. Consideration of Neigh borhood Wellness/Commu n ity Civil ity I n itiatives Page 2 2. Support of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility lnitiatives proposal, with the addition of 2-3 positions for permanent City residents, preferably from the most impacted areas, i.e., Alta Vista, Monterey Heights and Laguna, Thank you for your time and attention and for your efforts and concern regarding this issue. Sincerely, Sandra Rowley Chairperson Neighb orhood Wellness and Community Civility Initiative: Summary Report from the City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey Peter B. Chi, Ph.D. Department of Statistics California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 1 Intro duction On May 21, 2013, the Neighborhood Wellness / Community Civility Effort was launched in order to foster and improve the relationship between year round residents of San Luis Obispo, and students of California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), and Cuesta College. Sp ecifically, there has been a growing concern regarding student partying and disruptive behavior across the city of San Luis Obisp o. This has b een highlighted by particular incidents of recent years, such as Cal Poly’s Week of Welcome (WOW) in 2012, when an estimated 2000+ students congregated in the residential area just directly south of campus, causing disruption and safety concerns as roads became impassable (City of San Luis Obispo, 2013) In addition to implementing particular strategies aimed at addressing WOW scheduling to at- tempt to keep students occupied on campus instead of disrupting neighborhoods surrounding cam- pus, the Neighborhood Wellness / Community Civility Effort implemented an opinion survey across the city of San Luis Obispo. This survey was meant to capture feedback from permanent residents and students, with the aim of identifying strategies to produce outcomes towards the overall goal of neighborho od wellness. In this rep ort, data from the survey are analyzed and reported in order to identify any notable trends. With no specific a priori hypotheses, this exploratory data analysis aims to capture anything that may b e revealed from the data. A particular fo cus of the analyses, however, will b e on identifying potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non-student residents of San Luis Obispo. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 54 2 Metho dology The City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey was distributed with utility bills and across campus at Cal Poly. A total of 3,807 resp onses were received, and entered into SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey Inc., 2014). For analyses, the entire dataset was exported from SurveyMonkey as a comma-separated text file and imported into the statistical analysis platform called R (R Development Core Team, 2011). Questions were written to either gain identifying information on an individual (such as “With what ethnicity do you most identify?”), or to gain content regarding how the individual feels ab out a particular topic or situation (such as a Likert-scale response to “I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property.”). For this report, these will be referred to as “identifying questions” and “content questions,” resp ectively. Figures 1 and 2 below are the actual survey, where the identifying questions can be seen in Figure 1: Questions 1 through 12, and the content questions are Questions 13 through the end, across both Figures 1 and 2. 1. Do you live in San Luis Obispo city limits? O Yes. I am eligible to continue with the survey. O No. If you do not currently live in San Luis Obispo we would appreciate your willingness to fill out the survey. However, our primary initial focus is to target relations within San Luis Obispo city limits and we are limiting survey participants to this area. 2. What is your age? O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old O 52-58 years old 3. With what gender do you identify? O Male O Transgender O Female O No response. 4. Are you currently attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Cuesta College, or Allan Hancock College? O Yes. I am attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. O Yes. I am attending Cuesta College. O Yes. I am attending Allan Hancock College. O No. I am not currently attending any of these schools. If you are attending one of these schools, what year are you and what is your major? 5. With what ethnicity do you most identify? O African American/Black O American Indian/Alaska Native O Asian O Latino O Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander O W hite/Caucasian O Other (please specify): 6. Where is your current residence located? Please use your best judgement when picking a neighborhood O On Cal Poly’s campus. O Laguna area. O Cal Poly area. O Tank Farm/Broad area. O Johnson/Sinsheimer area. O Downtown area. O Foothill/N. Chorro area. 7. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? 8. Were you born in San Luis Obispo? O Yes O No 9. How many people live in your household (include yourself in the number)? O 1 O 3 O 5 O 7 O 2 O 4 O 6 O 8+ 10. In what age group are the people who live in your household (mark all that apply)? O 0-17 years old O 52-58 years old O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old 11. How many more years do you see yourself staying in San Luis Obispo? O I have no plans of leaving. O 1 year O 5 years O 2 years O 6 years O 3 years O 7 years O 4 years O 8+ years 12. If you are renting your residence, please mark all that apply: O I am renting a room in a shared residence. O My residence is managed by a property management company. O My landlord lives outside San Luis Obispo. O My landlord lives in San Luis Obispo. O My landlord lives in my residence. O I am not renting my residence. O Other (please specify): 13. When I return to my house after school or work: O I can assume that there will be parking relatively close to my house. O I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively close to my house. O I rarely find parking relatively close to my house. Comments: 14. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my household’s trashcans off of the street: O The same evening. O Sometime the next day. O Within the next 2 – 3 days. O Within the next week. Comments: 15. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, my neighbors usually bring in their household’s trashcans off of the street: O The same evening. O Sometime the next day. O Within the next 2 – 3 days. O Within the next week. Comments: 16. I frequently observe the following conditions in my neighborhood (check all that apply)? O Parking on the front yard. O Parking in the driveway with the vehicle extending over the sidewalk. O Fences with missing boards or that is not structurally sound. O Indoor furniture used outside or placed on rooftops. O Storage of inoperable vehicles or equipment. O Storage of building materials or other debris not associated with a valid building permit. O Illegally parked cars (i.e. opposite direction, red curb, etc.) Other (Please specify): 17. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a weeknight (Sunda y – Thursday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 18. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a weeknight (Sunda y – Thursday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 19. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a weekend night (Friday – Saturday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 20. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a weekend night (Friday - Saturday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 21. I feel comfortable addressing my neighbor if a concern arises. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 22. I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 23. I think there is enough unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 24. I would like to see more unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 25. Please mark all that apply in regards to the following statement: If one of my neighbors hosts a social gathering, I often notice… O Parking becomes unavailable quickly. O Garbage is left on my or other neighbors’ property. O Vomit on my or other neighbors’ property. O Other unwanted objects on my property. O Loud and disruptive activity on the street. O Little or no problems. Comments: 26. When I first moved to San Luis Obispo, the quality of life within the San Luis Obispo residential community was: Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly Unfavorable Favorable O O O O O Comments: 27. Currently, I feel the quality of life within the San Luis Obispo residential community is: Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly Unfavorable Favorable O O O O O Comments: 28. If there is a discrepancy between your answers to Questions 26 and 27, please comment on the shift of your view on community climate. Comments: Figure 1: Opinion Survey, page 1 APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 55 29. I believe the relationship between college-age students and permanent residents is important. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 30. I believe college-age students provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 31. I believe permanent residents provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 32. I believe a meaningful relationship between the college- age students and permanent residents should be a priority of the local government. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 33. I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions about improving community relationships. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 34. I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relationships. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 35. I believe college-age students provide an important role in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 36. I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a friend. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 37. I support a rental inspection program for commercial and residential housing. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 38. I believe property owners of rental properties are responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive to neighbors. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 39. I believe property owners can be proactive with their tenants about not being disruptive in residential neighborhoods. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 40. I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and programs to improve neighborhood civility. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 41. I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies and regulations for standards of conduct for their students to improve neighborhood civility. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 42. Have you ever been invited to be a participant in a discussion that involved Cal Poly and/or Cuesta and permanent residents? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 43. Have you ever participated in a discussion that involved Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 44. If invited to participate in a discussion that involved Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents, would you participate? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 45. At what times of the year, if any, do you notice the most disturbances in community neighborhoods? O Winter O Spring O Summer O Fall Comments: 46. If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be? 47. What suggestions do you have to improve the relations between the college-age students and permanent residents? 48. Are you interested in being contacted to share your opinions on these community related issues in the future? O Yes, my e-mail is: O No Neighborhood Wellness and Community Civility Initiative CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OPINION SURVEY In May of 2013, community representatives, Cuesta and Cal Poly administrators, students, and San Luis Obispo officials convened and ultimately launched a Neighborhood W ellness and Community Civility Initiative. Collectively, the group has a vision of a community in which year round residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding. With this vision comes a goal of enhancing the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student–aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. To learn more about this initiative, please visit www.slocity.org/police/communitycivility.asp The following survey is an integral s t e p i n this initiative. In order to assess the current conditions of neighborhood wellness, surveying residents of all ages and backgrounds will provide guidance for future actions taken by officials of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and Cuesta College. Please answer honestly and explain when you feel necessary. Should you have concerns arise about the survey, please contact Christine Wallace at cwallace@slocity.org. You have two options. You may complete the enclosed survey and return it in the postage-paid envelope OR you may complete the survey on-line at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PPNJHF6. Only one survey per person and only one survey per official postage-paid envelope please. Figure 2: Opinion Survey, page 2 Where appropriate, distributions of variables were compared using a standard statistical proce- dure known as a χ2 goodness-of-fit test (Pearson, 1900). As this pro ject was exploratory in nature, however, few formal statistical tests were actually performed. The majority of trends were simply shown in a qualitative manner, in graphical or tabular form. Additionally, a regular expression search was performed for certain free response questions, to isolate any common words that appeared most frequently. 3 Results 3.1 Descriptive Statistics An overview of our dataset, resulting from 3807 survey responses, is shown in Table 1. As expected, the vast ma jority of those b etween 18-24 years old are Cal Poly students (1591 out of 1672). Also, approximately 23% of non-students live in two areas that have a substantial student population: the APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 56 All residents Non-students Cal Poly Students Cuesta Students Characteristic Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Age 18-24 years old 1672 47.9 13 0.8 1591 95.8 60 51.7 25-31 years old 144 4.1 68 4 54 3.3 21 18.1 32-38 years old 117 3.4 101 6 10 0.6 5 4.3 39-45 years old 119 3.4 107 6.3 3 0.2 8 6.9 46-51 years old 114 3.3 109 6.5 0 0 5 4.3 52-58 years old 264 7.6 256 15.2 1 0.1 6 5.2 59-65 years old 346 9.9 336 19.9 0 0 7 6 66-71 years old 275 7.9 273 16.2 0 0 1 0.9 72-78 years old 205 5.9 196 11.6 0 0 2 1.7 79-85 years old 148 4.2 144 8.5 0 0 1 0.9 86+ years old 87 2.5 83 4.9 2 0.1 0 0 Ethnicity African American/Black 17 0.5 4 0.2 12 0.7 1 0.9 American Indian/Alaska Native 12 0.3 7 0.4 2 0.1 3 2.6 Asian 167 4.8 35 2.1 128 7.7 3 2.6 Latino 162 4.7 32 1.9 113 6.8 15 13 Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 14 0.4 8 0.5 5 0.3 1 0.9 White/Caucasian 2951 85.2 1518 91.1 1329 80.2 85 73.9 Other (please specify) 140 4 62 3.7 69 4.2 7 6.1 Neighborho od Cal Poly area. 746 21.6 134 8 592 35.7 18 18 Downtown area. 427 12.3 281 16.7 127 7.7 19 19 Foothill/N. Chorro area. 629 18.2 252 15 354 21.4 16 16 Johnson/Sinsheimer area. 372 10.8 305 18.2 52 3.1 11 11 Laguna area. 469 13.6 333 19.8 115 6.9 16 16 On Cal Poly’s campus. 376 10.9 0 0 374 22.6 1 1 Tank Farm/Broad area. 441 12.7 373 22.2 43 2.6 19 19 Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for the entire dataset “Cal Poly area” and the “Foothill/N. Chorro area.” Among these non-student residents of these two areas, roughly 90% of them are ab ove the age of 38, pointing towards the possibility of conflict between these residents and Cal Poly students. To determine the extent to which our study sample may have been biased with resp ect to the target population of all San Luis Obispo citizens, a comparison of the distributions of age and eth- nicity from our survey was made to that of 2010 Census data (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). The χ2 goodness-of-fit test revealed that our age and ethnicity distributions were indeed statistically significantly different from those of the Census data. Specifically, 18-24 year olds were overrep- resented in our sample (47.9% compared to 39.6% in Census data), and African Americans were APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 57 underrepresented in our sample (0.5% compared to 1.2% in Census data). Additionally, Hispanic or Latino ethnicities were not explicitly recorded in the 2010 Census data, so our accuracy with this population is unknown. 3.2 Strong Ma jority Opinion Exploration Our first analysis was to examine whether any content questions had a strong ma jority responding in any particular way. We scanned through the entire survey responses, with a threshold of 80% indicating a strong ma jority. Also, we looked at this within subgroups of the dataset, with subgroups defined by combinations of the identifying questions. Among all of the content questions, only two questions surfaced as having strong ma jority opin- ions through this exploration. They were (with ma jority response bolded): • When I return to my house after scho ol or work: – I can assume that there will be parking relatively close to my house – I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively close to my house – I rarely find parking relatively close to my house • After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my household’s trashcans off of the street: – The same evening – Sometime the next day – Within the next 2-3 days – Within the next week In the entire dataset, 81.1% resp onded that they can find parking relatively close to their house, and 80.9% responded that they bring in their trashcans on the same evening. Among subgroups defined by age, gender, ethnicity and all other identifying questions, plus combinations thereof, many subgroups identified these same two questions/responses at a greater than 80% rate. No other content question surfaced as having at least 80% of responses matching. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 58 Proportion 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 3.3 Contrasting Questions Exploration 3.3.1 Trashcans As observed in the previous section, 80.9% of the study sample reported that they bring their trashcans in on the same day. While this does not directly point to any possible conflict, we can compare this to the responses of the next question: “After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, my neighbors usually bring in their household’s trashcans off of the street. . . ” Sp ecifically, we can examine the distribution of responses among those who stated that they bring in their trashcans on the same day. Any of these individuals who report that their neighbors do anything other than bring their trashcans in on the same day will form a group who are potentially upset by this situation. This is summarized in Figure 3. Neighbors bring in their trashcans... (among those who responded that they bring in their trashcans the same evening) The same Sometime the Within the Within the evening next day next 2−3 days next week Response Figure 3: Distribution of responses about their neighbors, by p eople who reported bringing in their own trashcans on the same evening as the garbage companies empty them Since this is only among those who responded that they themselves bring in their trashcans on APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 59 Proportion 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 the same evening that the garbage companies empty them, it is plausible that they might expect the same from their neighbors. Thus, we observe that just over 30% of these individuals might potentially b e upset by this situation. Additionally, we explored whether this dichotomy was driven by a differing attitude between students and non-students. That is, when do students bring in their trashcans, and when do non- students bring in their trashcans? This is summarized in Figure 4. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my trashcans off the street: Non−students CP students The same Sometime the Within the Within the evening next day next 2−3 days next week Response Figure 4: Student vs. non-student responses regarding when they bring in their own trashcans As we observe above, Cal Poly students tend to bring their trashcans in at a later time than the non-student population. In particular, only about 60% of Cal Poly students report that they bring their trashcans in on the same evening. Finally, we examined the free resp onses attached to this question. Among a total of 156 non- students who left a free resp onse, approximately 35 of them left a comment that voiced frustration at the situation, such as: • “But some NEVER bring them in!” • “The adults do. Students not so much.” • “Poly students don’t understand trash rules.” APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 60 Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 7−8pm 8−9pm 9−10pm 10−11pm 11pm or later In contrast, approximately 10 of the comments app eared to indicate that this should not b e a concern of the city, e.g.: “I actually have no idea, I don’t care what my neighbors do with their trash cans as long as they don’t block my driveway.” The remaining comments appeared to be either neutral or of undeterminable tone. Also, an exam- ination of the student comments to this question revealed virtually zero who voiced frustration at the situation. It is im p ortant to note, however, that all of these counts are quite imprecise, as it was left entirely up to human judgement of a written phrase. 3.3.2 Time that it should be quiet Questions 17 and 18 asked contrasting questions about what time it should be, and actually is, quiet on a weeknight. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 5. I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weeknight (Sunday−Thursday) by approximately: should be is Figure 5: Side-by-side distributions of when it should b e and is quiet on a weeknight. To determine the proportion who might p otentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques- tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later time than what they stated for when it should b e quiet. In the entire dataset, 16.8% resp onded that it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weeknight. When separated APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 61 Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 7−8pm 8−9pm 9−10pm 10−11pm 11pm or later into Cal Poly students and non-students, the percentage potentially upset was 17.0% and 16.4%, respectively. Questions 19 and 20 were similar to Questions 17 and 18, but posed for the weekend nights. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 6. I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weekend (Friday−Saturday) by approximately: should be is Figure 6: Side-by-side distributions of when it should b e and is quiet on a weekend. To determine the proportion who might p otentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques- tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later time than what they stated for when it should be quiet. In the entire dataset, 14.8% responded that it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weekend night. When separated into Cal Poly students and non-students, the percentages potentially upset were 9.9% and 18.0%, respectively. 3.3.3 Quality of life at first vs. currently Questions 26 and 27 asked about the quality of life in San Luis Obisp o, when first moved to the town, and currently. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 7. Overall, it app ears that p eople are reporting a declining quality of life after living in San Luis Obispo for some amount of time. Specifically, 28.8% of all respondants rep orted that their current quality of life is worse than when they first moved to San Luis Obispo. When separated into Cal Poly students and non-students, the p ercentages rep orting a worse quality of life currently were 13.0% and 40.4%, respectively. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 62 Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Quality of live when first moved to / currently in San Luis Obispo: When first moved Currently Strongly Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Strongly Favorable Unfavorable Figure 7: Side-by-side distributions of quality of life when first moved to San Luis Obisp o vs. currently. An examination of the written comments, however, revealed no obvious trend or cause of the decline. Among non-students, comments ranged from “crime, drugs, late nite partys, housing authority trash/noise” to “Too much nit-picking while real problems go unresolved.” Although far fewer Cal Poly students rep orted a decline in quality of life over the time that they have lived here, there was a modest trend towards comments that expressed disdain for increasing rules/restrictions and police presence among those who did (16 out of 37 total written comments from Cal Poly students). 3.4 Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area residents As mentioned in Section 3.1, the Cal Poly and Fo othill / N. Chorro area are two lo cations in San Luis Obispo with a high mixing of students and non-students. A summary of resp onses to the Likert scale questions, separated by students and non-students in these areas, is shown in Table 2. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 63 Table 2: Likert scale questions for residents of the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area residents, separated by Cal Poly students and non-students. Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property. Cal Poly Students 0.21 0.46 0.18 0.11 0.05 Non-students 0.29 0.41 0.14 0.11 0.05 I would like to see more unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Cal Poly Students 0.03 0.11 0.27 0.25 0.33 Non-students 0.20 0.29 0.36 0.11 0.05 I believe the relationship between college age students and permanent residents is important. Cal Poly Students 0.34 0.53 0.10 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.54 0.39 0.05 0.01 0.01 I believe college age students provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.51 0.39 0.07 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.26 0.51 0.18 0.04 0.02 I believe permanent residents provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.39 0.49 0.10 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.71 0.26 0.01 0.01 0.01 I believe a meaningful relationship b etween the college age students and permanent residents should be a priority of the local government. Cal Poly Students 0.19 0.40 0.26 0.11 0.05 Non-students 0.42 0.40 0.13 0.02 0.02 I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions about improving community relationships. Cal Poly Students 0.07 0.28 0.33 0.22 0.10 Non-students 0.14 0.51 0.26 0.07 0.02 I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relationships. Cal Poly Students 0.20 0.46 0.29 0.05 0.00 Non-students 0.17 0.51 0.29 0.02 0.01 I believe college age students provide an important role in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.60 0.33 0.05 0.01 0.00 I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a friend. Non-students 0.29 0.44 0.19 0.06 0.02 Cal Poly Students 0.39 0.45 0.11 0.03 0.02 Non-students 0.32 0.33 0.14 0.10 0.11 I support a rental inspection program for commercial and residential rental housing. Cal Poly Students 0.20 0.32 0.27 0.14 0.08 Non-students 0.37 0.31 0.16 0.08 0.07 I believe property owners of rental properties are responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive to neighbors. Cal Poly Students 0.09 0.27 0.24 0.26 0.14 Non-students 0.53 0.31 0.05 0.06 0.05 I believe property owners can be proactive with their tenants about not being disruptive in residential neighborhoods. Cal Poly Students 0.11 0.50 0.25 0.09 0.06 Non-students 0.55 0.37 0.06 0.02 0.01 I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and programs to improve neighborhood civility. Cal Poly Students 0.05 0.30 0.38 0.13 0.14 Non-students 0.10 0.45 0.32 0.10 0.03 I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies and regulations for standards of conduct for their students to improve neighborhood civility. Cal Poly Students 0.06 0.35 0.38 0.13 0.08 Non-students 0.04 0.28 0.41 0.20 0.09 11 Notably, the distribution of responses for Cal Poly students vs. Non-students differed at a statistically significant level for all of the questions in the table above, except for the question: “I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relation- ships.” That is, every other Likert scale question in the above table points to a dichotomy of attitudes when comparing students vs. non-students who live in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. One specific contrast of interest is the differing of attitudes about who should b e responsible for whether tenants are disruptive to their neighbors or not. Among non-students, roughly 80- 90% believe (either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree”) that property owners should b e resp onsible for their tenants regarding their disruptiveness to neighbors, whereas only about 30% of students feel similarly. On the other hand, when asked if property owners can be proactive about the same issue, approximately 60% of students resp onded with either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree,” pointing to at least some degree of op enness to communication with their landlords regarding noise issues. Additionally, the trashcan and quiet time issues from Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 are at an increased level in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Using the same “potentially upset” definition as in the previous sections, approximately 37.0% of non-students living in these areas fall into this categorization. By comparison, in Section 3.3.1 we saw that approximately 30% of all citizens (that is, all students and non-students) fell into this categorization; in fact, this percentage is the same for non-students across all neighborhoo ds, indicating an increase in the prop ortion in this category for the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Regarding the time that it should be quiet on a weekday night, approximately 28.0% of non-students are categorized as potentially upset, and 31.2% are potentially upset for the weekend nights (compared to 17.0% and 18.0% as stated in Section 3.3.2). 3.5 Issues and Suggestions: written comments Question 46 asked: “If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?” APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 65 Using a regular expression search, Table 3 shows the most common words found in the resp onses, separated by students and non-students. non-students Cal Poly students word count word count downtown 110 students 142 homeless 90 college 91 traffic 87 residents 53 rental 72 noise 52 Poly 58 campus 47 street 42 parking 46 noise 41 housing 46 bars 40 police 42 residents 39 permanent 41 cars 35 Poly 39 Table 3: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?” All short words such as prepositions, conjunctions, and other low-content words (such as “more”) were removed from the list. Some words that do app ear on the list may not be that revealing, such as the usage of “students” or “college” by Cal Poly students in their comments. On the other hand, an examination of the non-student comments containing the word “downtown” showed comments that mainly focused on homelessness (overlapping with #2) and disruptive behavior associated with the bars (overlapping with #8). Question 47 asked: “What suggestions do you have to improve the relations b etween the college-age students and permanent residents?” Again using a regular expression search, Table 4 shows the most common words found in the responses to this question, separated by students and non-students. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 66 non-students Cal Poly students word count word count students 335 students 192 neighbors 103 residents 153 residents 93 college 137 Poly 80 permanent 111 college 80 community 71 campus 75 campus 55 respect 70 neighbors 45 community 60 noise 36 landlords 45 people 35 behavior 44 think 35 Table 4: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “What suggestions do you have to improve the relationship between the college-age students and permanent residents?” Again, not all words are extremely revealing. Of note, however, is the fact that the words “rule(s),”, “regulation(s),” and “fine(s)” do not appear on either list, suggesting that neither students nor non-students tend to believe that an increase in city ordinances is the answer. In contrast, we see words such as “respect,” “community” and “neighbors,” suggesting that ultimately, students and non-students would like to co-exist in a harmonious manner. A sp ecific response to this question that exemplifies this sentiment is one from a non-student living in the Foothill / N. Chorro area that states: “Have a beer with them - as long as they are of legal drinking age. Otherwise, you might have to buy them a fountain drink.” 4 Discussion and Conclusions In this rep ort, we summarize the results from the City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey. Certain trends were explored, with a focus on potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non- student residents of San Luis Obispo. It is imp ortant to note that, since this analysis was exploratory in nature, all of the findings must b e treated as suggestive, rather than as strong evidence in favor or in opp osition of any notion. Additionally, there is a slight concern for bias in the dataset, as noted in Section 3.1. The distributions of age and ethnicity in our survey dataset were statistically significantly different from APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 67 that of the Census data. However, the differences were not drastic; although this may indeed be a concern, it is relatively minor. Among all potential sources of conflict in San Luis Obispo, the one with the largest indication is the time that neighb ors bring their trashcans in, with approximately 30% of all residents being potentially upset. Noise at night does not appear to b e as much of an issue, except specifically in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas, where non-students are potentially upset at a rate of approximately 30% on both weeknights and weekends. The survey also revealed a vast dichotomy of attitudes between non-students and Cal Poly students. This is exposed in the responses to the Likert Scale questions in Table 2, and also with regard to when each group tends to bring their trashcans in. It does not appear likely that this systematic difference in attitude could be corrected by specific fines and ordinances. Rather, any strategy to remedy this must be aimed at addressing this broadly, b oth among students who plan to live off-campus, and for non-students who live in heavily student-populated areas. Future work could examine the question of whether any implemented strategies are working. In particular, certain increases in fines have indeed been in place since May 2010, aimed specifically at Halloween and St. Patrick’s Day (City of San Luis Obispo, 2013). From a statistical standp oint, the data up to this point do not suggest that the increase in fines have b een an effective deterrent of citable offenses. It is of course p ossible that, with more data, the evidence could arise, and this question could possibly be addressed properly at that time. However, as mentioned above, this report does not support the notion that sp ecific increases in fines will achieve outcomes consistent with neighborhood wellness. As student and non-student attitudes and expectations ab out residential life in San Luis Obispo are so dichotomous at this time, this must be addressed systematically, rather than by attempting to deter specific behaviors. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 68 References City of San Luis Obispo. Council agenda report, 2013. K. Pearson. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can b e reasonably supp osed to have arisen from random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series, 50:157–175, 1900. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foun- dation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2011. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. SurveyMonkey Inc. Surveymonkey. http://www.surveymonkey.com, 2014. U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2010, 2010. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 69 APPENDIX D: Matrix of all action items Objective One: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta leaders, etc. Allow neighbors to point out neighborhood issues Cal Poly Ongoing, began Summer of 2014 Investigate establishing S.N.A.P. Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program Increase the amount of support to assist with complaints and allow officers to do other police work City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options Decrease number of noise complaints City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property- maintenance concerns and behavior issues Hold repeat noise violators accountable City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods. Decrease properties that allow for high occupancy City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 70 Objective Two: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three) Reduce noise disruptions Cal Poly and Cuesta College (programmatic) City of San Luis Obispo (enforcement) Fall 2015 Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program Insure that rental units comply with required minimum health and safety standards City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods (no specific recommendations discerned from the survey results) Improve student and community relationships Cal Poly Associated Student, Inc. (ASI) and Associate Students for Cuesta College (ASCC) Spring 2016 Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Address and decrease safety-related issues City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing per LUCE strategies Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up Increase the number of student-age residents to comply with the 24-hour ordinance City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) A reduction in the impacts of homelessness on the community City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Reduce traffic-related issues in neighborhoods City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 71 Objective Three: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office Set expectations and responsibilities for students living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo Cal Poly Summer 2015 Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions Establish positive interaction with City Cal Poly ASI , ASCC, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program Rental properties that meet minimum health and safety standards Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students Raise awareness of the impacts of noise on neighborhood Cal Poly Spring 2016 Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20- minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer Fewer noise citations City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods Create positive interactions between students and year- round residents Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods Enhance a positive culture of peer-to-peer accountability in neighborhoods Cal Poly ASI Ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 72 Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups Improve collaboration and understanding among students, non- students and city groups SCLC Ongoing Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus to support students, non- students and permanent residents living in neighborhoods. Educate students about university policies and ordinances, strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogs Cal Poly & Cuesta College Fall 2015 Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk”. Positive engagement with law enforcement and decrease repeat offending properties City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing generates letter signed by university, police and city that outlines expectations sent to resident and landlord Cal Poly Fall 2015 Objective Four: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation City and Cal Poly officials to craft a Memorandum of Understanding agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol within a one- mile radius Allows for coordination of resources to quickly respond to community concerns Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals To coordinate resources and obtain program goals City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Change student culture related to neighborhood SCLC Fall 2016, and with each annual report Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 73 Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness wellness Implement a keg registration program A reduction in underage alcohol use and an accountability mechanism for persons who serve minors City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population Meet the needs of the community as population grows City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus Meet the needs of Cal Poly as student population grows Cal Poly Spring 2016 Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations To be able to patrol in neighborhoods adjacent to Cal Poly campus Addressed via MOU identified above Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Coordinate law enforcement outreach and problem solving efforts Cal Poly Fall 2018 Objective Five: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources Effectively inform the community on matters of neighborhood wellness City of San Luis Obispo Winter 2015 Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 74 Objective Six: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Re-invest in the Student- Community Liaison Committee Become the coordinating body responsible for monitoring the recommendations, once adopted by the city council, Cal Poly and Cuesta College SCLC Fall 2015, ongoing The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented Recommend the appropriate changes, and produce an annual report on the state of neighborhood wellness in the City of San Luis Obispo SCLC Ongoing Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should be reevaluated to directly involve those individuals (by their position) most directly involved in neighborhood wellness SCLC Spring 2016 Host an annual town hall meeting Present their report to the community, receive feedback and suggestions from the broader San Luis Obispo community SCLC Spring 2016, ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 75 APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. Objective 1: Define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance quality of life for all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the opening of the Cal Poly and Cuesta College campuses at the beginning of the school year. 1 Develop smoother lines of communication between the city, Cal Poly and Cuesta both proactively and reactively. 2 Students need to be informed of the consequences of their actions off campus and perhaps have responses strengthened to moderate behavior. 3 Quicker administrative response is needed to violations of behavior off campus by the city, Cal Poly and Cuesta. Objective 2: Define Stakeholders’ Needs and Success 4 Create a tip line where anyone (students, neighbors, etc.) can report potential problems before they have negative impact on the community. Objective 3: Identify University/City Best Practices 5 Advance the effort to house Greek organizations on the Cal Poly campus. 6 Create a student ambassador program that has two components. The first component should be to promote positive relations in the community. The second component should be an anonymous social event attendee to report unsafe behavior to the appropriate authority. 7 Improve response time by SLOPD and UPD to reports of noise off campus. 8 Bring alternative social/entertainment opportunities on campus to reduce the reliance on off campus events for socialization. 9 Reach out to universities who consistently host regulated tailgate parties, with monitored alcohol distribution. Learn what works well for them and bring their best practices to Cal Poly tailgates. 10 Increase the methods to hold landlords accountable for the negative behavior of their tenants including court appearances by the landlord or denial of business license. 11 Suggest that landlords add clause in rental agreements that prevents any activity on roof. Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 76 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. 12 Aggressively advance the Rental Inspection ordinance to identify unsafe and unhealthy properties. 13 Evaluate “Neighborhood Specialists” like in Davis (Maybe adjust hours/days of existing Neighborhood Specialists. 14 Continue to develop strategies that promote more diverse neighborhoods, including more owner-occupied and long-term rentals (ie workers and family rentals, not short term academic year rentals) 15 SLOPD and UPD should collaborate on methods to deter large crowds from migrating from area to area. 16 Implement programs that create peer to peer pressure, that help students own their actions and accept responsibility for behavior that does not promote neighborhood wellness. Objective 4: Review Enforcement Best Practices 17 Consider the size and scope of a party to help determine what safety and hazard city ordinances can be created/enforced? Perhaps double or triple fines during peak hours or holidays where large parties/events are expected. 18 Limit the number of student rental properties to one per street. 19 Create and enforce a 10:00 pm noise curfew with escalating noise fines by the hour. 20 More visible UPD presence on campus and in the residential neighborhoods immediately surrounding campus (an MOU is currently being finalized to allow UPD to issue municipal citations off campus). 21 Issue a citation to the leadership figure of the organization responsible for hosting an out- of-control party. Consider exploring ways to hold the national organization responsible as well. 22 Consider installing more security cameras to effectively monitor activity. 23 Create a staff position to investigate potential dangerous student activity before events take place. 24 Enforce limits on the size of parties at residential addresses. 25 Create a culture change regarding informants. Students offer information to a point, but stop divulging information for fear of implicating themselves. Re-work current policy to ensure informants will not be reprimanded to encourage future sharing. 26 Citations should be issued to those students who participated in negative events. 27 City approval should be required for individuals or organizations hosting a party over a Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 77 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. certain number of people. 28 Red tag ordinance for houses that have unruly gatherings/noise citations should be implemented and last longer than the academic year. 29 Find a way to hold property managers or management companies accountable for the negative behavior at properties they manage. 30 Serious academic consequences up to suspension and expulsion should be on the table for Students who engage in activities that do not promote neighborhood wellness. 31 Immediately suspend or permanently ban fraternities who allow in any way illegal activities to happen via their instigation: rapes, underage drinking, hazing deaths, racist displays, unruly gatherings. Second chances seem to mean “go ahead” to this crowd. 32 Parental notification should be explored for off campus behavior. 33 Higher fines, double fines, longer fines, fines able to be raised at certain time of day. Objective 5: Engage Stakeholders: Review Current Educational And Information Efforts 34 Require students to complete an alcohol/safety education program before being allowed rush for a Greek organization (we should also consider limiting Greek organization recruitment to the first quarter of attendance). 35 Monitor Yik Yak and other social mediums used by our student population as a resource to inform us of potential dangerous situations. 36 SLOPD should consider utilizing social media scanning software to be more aware of activities planned off campus. 37 The city should inform the landlord every time the police are called to a rental property, even if no violation is found. 38 Enhance education on the dangers of large crowds: students need to learn this is as bad as drinking too much, nonconsensual sex and other immature or inappropriate or illegal behaviors. 39 Evaluate systems & structures in dorms to prevent mass exodus to mega social gathering and complement protocols to inform authorities (student affairs UPD SLOPD) of eminent threat of unruly gathering (mega social gathering). 40 Targeted patrolling by city and university police. Wider area for UPD patrols. Objective 6: Prepare for Sustained Engagement to Achieve Desired Vision and Goal 41 None. Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 78 MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS A Research Paper presented to the San Luis Obispo Civility Working Group on Different Approaches to Students Living in Established Residential Areas July 18, 2014 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 79 I . . APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 80 ""' CITY OF S.flll LUIS OBISPO Civilit y Working Group The City of San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort is a working group comprised of City residents and representatives of Cal Poly State University (Cal Poly), Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo (City). The goal of the working group is to enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behavior. This goal is to be reached by identifying the needs of those involved and the short- term actions, long-term best practices and engagement efforts required by the City and schools to successfully meet those needs. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort Cal Pol y President City Council Cuesta College President CUESTA 11LtJ COLLEGE ...- - ,•._.._,...,,..»..p. ublic lnput----lllllliiiiii Mission: Rf!s Mr.h, ill ntffy and implement Cal ..,...,..i--..;;::;r;;...., _..Recommend"'"•'"""""-''"'""""'"'"''"'.,...,_..,"",.a. Poly, Council, and Cvl!staJtrategies to l.'nh.m[ethequality of life for all residents with an emphasis on builtUngposltive relations between resldentiilland student-aced neighbors through COmmliltlllt'( De opment Deparl nt foWe DrD tl li'NI"I PubUcWor De:::: nl t1t Cal Poly l'rflld«llf'• v M.m.: grr omcr Cal Poly-City- Cuesta Working Group 7 ( LICOifii• ( NTI (I)iMIJ• Vir.ePfl.'SIJ:lNII Studuttufe l Smd""\' S•I'II M & qd.......,Hp A.!.todf{fd Slli OO"" PrM.Idt"nt acullurill!.hiltiu '------------------;r"' social behaviors Public / . _/\_\ Neighborhood Services Team Mission: EKChange .jei wJ -,; jl1 c.WHI c Y Neighborhood CM'M <i!.I Yd MU C<Jifloty!>twh•JJl'> Cl f'oJyA I C.lll'olyHnu< "i Group\ Rfowdi' •Tf Information and Ideas to Implement nel&hborhood 1fllj21.Jl APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 81 CIT Y OF S.fill LUIS OBISPO FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, City of San Luis Obispo Prepared By: James David, Principal Analyst Lisa Letteriello, Administration Intern SUBJECT: MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS PURPOSE Review current local town-gown neighborhood issues and provide alternative practices in other communities that face similar student housing challenges in residential areas. DISCUSSION Situation The City of San Luis Obispo (City) is in close proximity to two colleges; Cuesta College and Cal Poly. Cuesta College is a commuter school without campus housing, and Cal Poly does not have sufficient on-campus housing for all enrolled students (there are plans to create more housing opportunities on-campus in the next five years). Furthermore, college students often prefer to live off-campus in their junior and senior years. These factors mean students seek housing in the City limits, and the most predominant housing type in the City is low-density single-family housing in established neighborhoods. A number of issues have been reported over the years related to students living in low-density residential neighborhoods: 1. Students tend to live in certain areas close to campus, which affects neighborhood diversity. High concentrations of student renters living in neighborhoods compounds and intensifies issues like partying, noise and parking. Renter-occupancy estimates for census tracts immediately adjacent to Cal Poly range from 59 to 95 percent renters: Selected Housing Characteristics from U.S. Census 1 CHARACTERISTIC CENSUS TRACT 109.01 CENSUS TRACT 109.02 CENSUS TRACT 112 TOTAL {ALL 3 TRACTS) CITYWIDE Total Housing Units 1,032 1,561 3,033 5,626 20,553 Single-Family Residences 10% 40% 62% 46% 54% Units Built 1950 to 1979 53% 64% 62% 61% 48% Owner-occupied Units 5% 13% 41% 26% 38% Renter-occupied Units 95% 87% 59% 74% 62% 1 Estimates do not include on-campus housing units, which are classified as "group quarters" by the U.S. Census. Source: 2008-12 American Community Survey, 2010 U.S. Census APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 82 CITY OF SHU LUIS OBISPO Reference Map of Census Tracts near Cal Poly 109.01 110 2. Rental costs are high, which drives more students (smaller incomes) to live together in one single family home. Most single-family homes are not designed for four to five adults, especially in terms of bathroom facilities and parking. 3. The City's code enforcement data shows a correlation between high rental areas and reported violations of municipal codes. Some repeated reported violations include: a. Noise, public drunkenness, vandalism and crime b. Property maintenance issues c. Parking 4. Local housing costs are inflated because four to five students can and will pay more for rental housing than the majority of the local workforce, especially those workers in industries with lower wages. This causes many workers to commute, which affects infrastructure (roads), environment (emissions) and society (less owner- occupancy/pride of ownership). These issues are common in many town-gown communities when large student populations move . in to residential neighborhoods; sometimes referred to as "studentification". Studentification is a term coined by Dr. Darren Smith (2002) and is defined as the social and environmental changes caused by a very large number of students living in particular areas of a APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 83 CITY OF S.Hn LUIS OBISPO town or city. It is not necessarily students living in the community, but instead the substitution of a local community by a student community. 1 The City desires to avoid "studentification" in its low-density residential neighborhoods. The following sections identify ideas for potential solutions -including best management practices from nationwide research- to be considered by the Civility Working Group. Potential Solutions Two main focus areas should be (1) increasing neighborhood diversity and (2) enhancing affordable housing options. 1. Increasing Neighborhood Diversity Diversifying neighborhoods means creating a healthy balance of renters and owner-occupants, as well as a mix of resident types (families, students, couples, singles, etc.). Within the context of student housing, limiting concentration of student rentals increases neighborhood diversity. A. Consider a Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and many other communities facing foreclosure and abandonment issues, instituted an NSP to help troubled neighborhoods rebound. 2 Using a revolving NSP fund, abandoned and foreclosed homes were purchased and then resold at a discounted price to homebuyers in need of assistance. The same philosophy could be implemented in residential neighborhoods to create more opportunities for owner-occupied housing units. Potential NSP elements may include: a. Establish a revolving fund to be used exclusively to purchase single-family homes within targeted neighborhoods (such as Alta Vista and Monterey Heights) as they become available on the open market. b. Resell all homes purchased with the revolving fund within a reasonable time to likely owner-occupants; university staff, faculty or other workforce buyers. c. Evaluate legally permissible mechanisms to perpetuate owner-occupancy, such as a homeowners association (HOA), that are consistent with fair housing provisions of State and Federal laws. Developing a HOA for NSP homes is preferable because the HOA can impose conditions, covenants and agreements that require owner-occupancy of the primary residence for a minimum length of time. d. Proceeds from all home sales would go to replenish the revolving fund. e. Maintain "right of first refusal" granting the NSP the right to re-purchase the home when it is offered for sale. f. The NSP could be established on a limited-term basis, or terminated when owner-occupancy rates for single-family units within targeted neighborhoods reach a certain level that could be seen as self-sustaining. 1 Town and Gown Glossary. http://www.towngownworld.com/towngownglossary.html 2 http: //porta l.hud.gov/hudportai/HUD?sr c=/program offices/comm plannlng/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg. APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 84 CIT Y OF S.flnLUIS OBISPO This alternative has complicated legal issues surrounding real property rights, equal protection, and privacy that will require more research if the Civility Working Group supports further development of a NSP. B. Look for opportunities to create faculty and staff housing in student areas. The College of San Mateo, California, has an award winning 44-unit rental housing development for faculty and staff (College Vista), which offers a first-class living environment with rents at half the market average.3 A local example is the 69-unit Bella Montana workforce housing project located in a neighborhood that is impacted with student rentals immediately adjacent to Cal Poly campus. The ground sublease has a ranking priority hierarchy that encourages purchase by Cal Poly faculty and staff, with a back-up market priority for public education, public agency, other CSU employees, and the general public. In all, there are 24 priority rankings in the sublease with newly recruited Cal Poly faculty receiving the highest priority and the general public receiving the lowest. Bella Montana is different from most condominiums in that the structures are owned by the buyers, while Cal Poly remains the owner of the ground upon which the structure sits and has greater control over the conditions of sale of the condos. C. Evaluate strengthening occupancy restrictions to avoid single-family residential overcrowding. The City of Fort Collins, home to Colorado State University, restricts occupancy in all residential dwelling units (single-family, duplex, and multifamily) to one family and not more than one additional person; or two adults and their dependents, and not more than one additional person, or up to four unrelated persons in a dwelling unit located in an apartment complex containing units which were approved to house four unrelated persons.4 The City of San Luis Obispo's Zoning Regulations prohibit six or more adult occupants in the low-density residential zone without a High Occupancy Use Permit. D. Develop a rental inspection program that checks occupancy. The City of Bloomington, home to Indiana University Bloomington, implemented a Rental Occupancy Program that requires rental property inspection every three to five years to validate current occupancy permits. Occupancy permits allow up to three unrelated adults in single- family zoning districts, and up to five in multi-family zoning districts. 5 The City of Santa Cruz, California adopted a 2010 ordinance that requires all owners of one or more residential rental dwelling units to register with the city and participate in an annual inspection. The Santa Cruz program aims to address unpermitted dwelling units and the renting of spaces not intended for habitation, as well as substandard, overcrowded, unsanitary and unsafe housing conditions that render a housing _unit unfit or unsafe for occupancy.6 The City of San Luis Obispo is currently developing a multifamily rental inspection program to be presented to the public and City Council in late 2014. '.h ttp://www.smccd .edy/accounis/smccd/departments/faclllt les/BestAmerlca nllvlngAwa rd.shtml. 'http://www.fcgov.com/neighborhoodservices/occupancy. php 'http://www.ltgau.org/userA ies/flles/CityBrochure-Bioomi ngton.pdf 6 Santa Cruz Residential Rental Inspection Program. http:l!www .cityofsantacruz.com/index.aspx?page=1536. APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 85 CITY OF S.fin LUIS OBISPO E. Work with common interest developments on restrictive leases. In California, courts have allowed homeowners associations to limit or ban rentals in private condominium projects or planned developments. Restrictions against leasing in a common interest development must be shown to be reasonable in order to be enforceable per California Civil Code Sections 711 and 1354. In the case City of Oceanside v. McKenna (1989), the Oceanside court found that restrictions on a publicly subsidized condominium project to require owner-occupancy and forbid the leasing of units was valid. The justification offered by the City and its Community Development Commission was found reasonable since prohibiting leasing would foster the redevelopment goals of providing a stabilized community of owner-occupied units for low and moderate income persons.7 F. Create more on-campus housing. Giving students more opportunities to live on-campus may reduce concentration of students living in nearby low-density residential neighborhoods. Cal Poly and the City have adopted policies that support student housing on-campus, and Cal Poly is planning to build a new 1475-bed campus housing facility soon. Other universities require all freshmen to live on-campus, and some also require that freshmen leave their cars at home the first year. In addition to providing new campus housing, Cal Poly could formally adopt a goal to house a certain percentage of students on campus by a specified date. 2. Enhancing Affordable Housing Options Creating affordable housing is a local, regional and national objective. Within the context of student housing, creating affordable options means offering more housing types with different cost profiles so that students may avoid overcrowding in single-family residences. A. Create partnerships to achieve common affordable housing goals. Northeastern University, Massachusetts, provides a good example of this approach in its Davenport Commons. The project consists of 125 units of housing for students and staff, 60 affordable owner-occupied townhouses, and 2,100 square feet of retail space. 8 It was a complex project, involving many stakeholders and negotiations including a community benefits package of affordable housing, helping homeowners start a condominium association and providing both technical assistance and education for first-time home buyers. B. Continue to distribute Good Neighbor guides and update off-campus housing outreach materials. The University of Virginia 9 and the City of Fort Collins 10 have developed guides that include tips for finding affordable off-campus housing, advice about the financial responsibilities of living on their own, and behavior expected of a good neighbor and community member. Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City should update their off-campus housing guides to include affordable housing options in the region. The 7 The Case for Rental Restrictions. http://www.hoa-iaw.com/publicalions/case--rental-restridions.shtml 'http://www.dhkinc.com/Housing/affordable/9703.asp • http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/off grounds guide.pdf 10 http://www.fcgov.com/nelghborhoodservlces/pdf/lthandbook.pdf?20081224 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 86 CIT Y OF SHU LUIS OBISPO guides should also list reasons why overcrowding in low-density residential housing can adversely affect health and safety of tenants, impact available parking, arid contribute to noise and privacy conflicts. Additional Resources The following four resources come from other town-gown communities that have formed public-private task forces with a similar mission to the Civility Working Group. Each document contains recommended actions to address issues that often arise from off-campus student living in residential neighborhoods. 1. Central Austin Community Development Corporation. 2005. What Other College Communities Have Done: Examples of Regulatory Actions to Preserve the Single-Family, Residential Character of a Campus Neighborhood. http://centralaustincdc.org/fair affordable housing/west urbana na ccupancy.pdf 2. Rutgers University. 2013. Task Force for Off Campus Issues and Concerns: Final Report and Recommendations. http://studentconduct.rutgers.edu/files/documents/O ffCam pusTas kForceReport.pdf 3. St. Paul Planning Commission. May 2012. Student Housing Zoning Study: Report and Recommendations. http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/20436 4. Temple University. 2012. Final Report of the Community and Student Off Campus Issues and Concerns Task Force. http://w ww.temple.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents/documents/StudentComm unityOff CampuslssuesTaskForceFina1ReportforWebsiteNov2012.pdf The remaining four resources listed below are academic studies and white papers on the issues of studentification and town-gown collaborations. 5. Smith, Darren P. 2005. Studentification: the gentrification factory? http://southwarknotes.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/studentification-darren-smith.pdf 6. Smith, Darren P. 2008. The Politics of Studentification and (Un)balanced Urban Populations: Lessons for Gentrification and Sustainable Communities? http://usj.sagepub.com/content/45/12/2541.full.pdf+html 7. U.K. National HMO Lobby. 2008. Balanced Communities & Studentification: Problems and Solutions. http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/Nationai%20HM0%20Lobby.pdf 8. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 2009. Town-Gown Collaboration in Land Use and Development. http://community-wealth.org/ pdfs/news/recent-articles/11-09/report- sungu-eryilmaz.pdf APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 87 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 28 - Enhancing the quality of life for all residents - January 7, 2011 Dear Mayor and Council Members, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods is again appreciative of the opportunity to provide input during the City’s budget process. We are acutely aware of the City’s current and projected financial situation. Sandra Rowley and I participated in the Fiscal Sustainability Task Force and gained a clear understanding of the budget issues facing the City, and I can assure you that our Board of Directors took those issues seriously when discussing and deciding the actions we are recommending. Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) began as a small group of involved citizens who initiated a process that eventually resulted in the formation of neighborhood parking districts and adoption of the City’s High Occupancy Ordinance. RQN continues to represent quality of life issues that impact residents in all of our City neighborhoods. Changes to the Garage Conversion requirements and adoption of the Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance all began through RQN input. Recent adoption of more stringent noise regulations, to include changes to the Premise list and property owners’ responsibility, and the Unruly Gathering Ordinance were a direct result of our continuing efforts to address and reduce the significant number of noise calls made annually. Our neighborhoods continue to face serious challenges with significant effects not only on residents’ quality of life but also the spillover to other areas of city life – the ability to attract families and employers, the ability to maintain civic and other volunteer organizations, the ability to provide arts and entertainment, and the ability to provide conveniently located schools – just to name a few, all depend on providing a high quality of life in our neighborhoods. Most neighborhoods in our community show symptoms of neglect – whether it simply be trash containers sitting out all week, cars parked in the yard or hanging over the sidewalk, the lack of landscape maintenance, or furniture and appliances left at the curb – or more serious issues involving code violations and blighted properties. These issues all affect the quality of life for current residents and have the same spillover effects mentioned above. The City has depended on complaint driven enforcement to address many of these neighborhood issues. Changes to the owner/renter mix that accelerated through the mid-1980’s has created an environment where complaint driven enforcement is no longer a viable means of addressing many of the issues facing neighborhoods. Proactive enforcement of City codes and ordinances are imperative if the community is to address and restore neighborhood quality of life and avoid blight throughout the City. The passage of Measure Y held the promise of more funding for neighborhood-related issues and wellness programs contained in Housing Element Goal 7 – Neighborhood Quality. The adoption of ‘neighborhood police patrols’ and ‘strengthening neighborhood code enforcement’ as two of the City’s major city goals gave residents reason to believe that neighborhood issues would finally be addressed and their quality of life would improve. Residents for Quality Neighborhoods eagerly anticipated the creation of a Neighborhood Policing Program being developed by Chief Linden to provide two 2-officer teams to patrol the neighborhoods and address many of the noise, parking and Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance (NEO) violations that negatively impacted residents. Unfortunately, a series of events culminating in an economic downturn that further eroded the City’s economic condition all but scrapped plans for any type of Neighborhood Policing Program. However, the need for a proactive approach to neighborhood wellness did not diminish with the downturn of the City’s financial condition. Understanding the fiscal issues facing the City, RQN began researching similar communities and the approaches being used there to address the types of problems our community faces. Based on approaches used in both the City of Davis and the City of Azusa, RQN proposes that new positions be created to proactively address NEO violations and enforce Noise Ordinance provisions. The job description and duties of the position, Neighborhood Services Specialist, would fall between Student Neighborhood Assistant Program (SNAP) personnel and a sworn police officer (see attachment) and interface with Code Enforcement. The position would be responsible for actively patrolling neighborhoods and ensuring compliance with City codes. The Neighborhood Services Specialist would also issue parking citations, NEO citations, and noise warnings and citations. Potential code violations would be forwarded to Code Enforcement. The requirements of the position and the commensurate salary range would be less than that of the Code Enforcement position and obviously less than a sworn police officer. The position would differ from that of SNAP personnel in that Neighborhood Services Specialists would be full time or full time equivalents. Job experience, education, and training would be greater. RQN believes that a salary range between $42,000 and $45,500 plus benefits would be sufficient to garner qualified applicants. RQN recommends that three full time equivalent positions be created, consisting of two full time positions and two ½ time positions primarily for evening enforcement of the noise ordinance and parking districts. Funding for the positions includes the collections of fines and forfeitures, maintaining unfilled police officer positions, and funding from rental property business licensing. Sincerely, Brett Cross RQN Chair ATTACHMENT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES SPECIALIST DESCRIPTION: Neighborhood Services Specialist performs a variety of duties necessary to implement and sustain neighborhood wellness. The position requires a knowledge of current laws, codes and ordinances related to party noise, neighborhood enhancement, and parking with a thorough understanding of neighborhood issues and dynamics. This position is distinguished by the use of independent judgment, the level of coordination required to interface with code enforcement and the degree of interpersonal skills required to perform successfully. SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED: Receives general supervision and training from a police supervisor and/or manager. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: --Responds to complaints of party noise in residential neighborhoods. --Issues Disturbance Advisory Cards (DAC) or Citations, as appropriate, for noise violations. --Utilizes and interprets the noise information database. --Coordinates with other police personnel and City Code Enforcement personnel as necessary. --Investigates complaints of Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance (NEO) violations and issues notices of non-compliance and/or citations as applicable. --Issues parking citations for violations in residential parking districts. --Issues citations for parking violations. --Works closely with violators to assist them in finding solutions to problems. --Establishes relationships with neighborhood organizations. KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITIES: KNOWLEDGE OF: --Geography and population distribution of the City. --Pertinent noise, neighborhood enhancement ordinance (NEO), and parking laws, rules, and regulations. --Basic computer skills. --Correct English usage. --Principles, practices, and techniques for communication with the public. ABILITY TO: --Communicate effectively both orally and in writing. --Work independently with little supervision and exercise initiative and sound judgment. --Maintain accurate reports and records related to duties performed and equipment used. --Read and interpret laws and regulations. --Follow oral and written instructions. --Interpret and apply operational procedures and the law to field situations. --Communicate effectively with service population in an enforcement setting. --Explain the law to the public. EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE: --High school diploma or GED. --Must be at least twenty-one (21) years of age. -- Any combination of experience and training that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. One way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be one year experience in a law enforcement environment and with public contact. POSSESSION AND MAINTENANCE OF: --A valid Class “C” California Driver's License. --Free of misdemeanor or felony convictions. 541 From:Diepenbrock, Arlen Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 3:59 PM To:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola Cc:Salem, Rami Subject:FW: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hey Elizabeth, I would like to begin scheduling the inspections for next week. Do you reach out to schedule these or should I begin shootin off emails? We are going to require that the president of the organization be present for the inspection this year so that we can disseminate some critical information. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:34 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org>; Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu>; Salem, Rami <RSalem@slocity.org> Cc: Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Looping in Rami as he will be the officer to perform these inspections. Rami, please work with Arlen to find a time that works for both of you. Thanks, John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development 542 Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 5:20 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Thanks, Ill work with Code Enforcement to hammer out some dates that work for both of us. From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 9:39 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>; Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Here is their email address: slolca.alpha@gmail.com Beginning of October works for me! Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 8:34 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Cc: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>, Hutchinson, Julianna <JHutchin@slocity.org>, Beres, Jason <jberes@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Frats and Sororities 2024 Elizabeth, Thanks for the update, lets get an email address for the last one on the list and if Code Enforcement is available, depending on availability I would like to begin scheduling these inspections for the beginning of Oct. Please let me know if this works for everyone. Alpha Chi Omega 1464 E Foothill Blvd SLO axo.president.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma 1328 E. Foothill Blvd. dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Gamma Phi Beta 1326 Higuera Street gphibpresident@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi 190 Stenner Street aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi 1290 E Foothill Blvd sloaphipres@gmail.com 543 Chi Omega 700 Grand Avenue chiopres.cp@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma 244 California Blvd kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa 615 Grand Ave sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Pl president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com Phi Kappa Psi 1335 Foothill Blvd cpphipsipresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd cpthetapresident@gmail.com Delta Upsilon 720 Foothill Blvd ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Sigma Nu 1304 East Foothill Blvd Cpsnupresident@gmail.com Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd. aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 Foothill Blvd. Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 2:56 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hi Arlen, The only other addition is: Lambda Chi Alpha – 1264 Foothill Blvd. Let me know what week and times work for you and your team and I can get them scheduled! Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me 544 From: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Date: Monday, September 23, 2024 at 11:42 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: Frats and Sororities 2024 Hey Elizabeth, I am looking to begin setting up inspections for the frats and sororities for 2024. Is the below list still current? Are ther e any others that we need to add or update any addresses? Are you still the best contact for this? Thanks Arlen Diepenbrock Fire Inspector I Fire Department E adiepenb@slocity.org T 805.781.7552 C 805.503.2062 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 2:35 PM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Returning your phone call This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Arlen, Here is the contact information for the houses that had Fire Inspections this Fall: Alpha Chi Omega 1464 E Foothill Blvd SLO axo.president.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma 1328 E. Foothill Blvd. dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Gamma Phi Beta 1326 Higuera Street gphibpresident@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi 190 Stenner Street aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi 1290 E Foothill Blvd sloaphipres@gmail.com Chi Omega 700 Grand Avenue chiopres.cp@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma 244 California Blvd kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa 615 Grand Ave sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista Pl president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com 545 Phi Kappa Psi 1335 Foothill Blvd cpphipsipresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta 180 California Blvd cpthetapresident@gmail.com Delta Upsilon 720 Foothill Blvd ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Sigma Nu 1304 East Foothill Blvd Cpsnupresident@gmail.com Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd. aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Date: Friday, January 26, 2024 at 9:26 AM To: Diepenbrock, Arlen <adiepenb@slocity.org> Subject: Returning your phone call Hi Arlen, I’m sorry to have missed your call yesterday, I was out sick. I just tried calling you back but it keeps going straight to voicemail without letting me leave one. Feel free to give me a call back today and I’ll try and catch you, or I’d be happy to answer any questions you have over email! Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me 546 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 3:57 PM To:Mezzapesa, John Subject:Ask SLO Notification of new Request #: 8357 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8357 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to Rami Salem by Rami Salem. Request type: Problem Request area: Substandard Rental Housing (Tenant Occupied) Citizen name: Rami Salem Description: Visible storage. Spoke with tenants (Fraternity members) and informed them that they need to properly store or screen all visible storage at the property. I informed them that I will be re-inspecting the property by the 15th of October. Location: 190 Crandall Way Expected Close Date: October 15, 2024 Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 574 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 1:05 PM To:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola Subject:RE: FSL this week Perf, thanks so much! CW From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 12:57 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: FSL this week This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hello! I am also one of those tired faces 뇤뇪뇫뇥뇦뇯뇰 Everyone is good for this week! USFC is tonight in the Business Building (3), room 113 at 6:10pm. IFC is in building 3 room 114 tomorrow at the usual 11:10am time! And PHA will be in their usual UU220 room on Thursday at 11 :) Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Why Do Pronouns Matter? Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 12:49:26 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: FSL this week Hi Elizabeth, Hope this weekend went well! I saw lots of gals in identical outfits around town with very tired faces. I’m confirming my visits to USFC, IFC and PHC this week. Am I good to go for tonight, Tuesday and Thursday? No worries if I need to adjust. Thanks, 575 Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 576 From:kathie walker < Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 11:44 AM To:Menesez, Marjorie Subject:Re: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities No worries! Thank you for checking again! :) Hope you have a great week. On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 11:43 AM Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> wrote: You’re right Kathie, contacts are attached. Sorry about that! 뇤달닭눉닮닯닰닪닫 From: kathie walker < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 11:30 AM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Hello again Marjorie, I just wanted to clarify the noise calls for 1236 Monte Vista Place from 8/1/2022 to the present. My records for earlier dates (up to 6/6/2023) show noise calls in that timeframe. Would you mind checking again for noise calls from 8/1/2022 to the present? Thank you for your help. On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:08 AM Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> wrote: Hello again Kathie, Attached are all the contacts we had since 08/01/22. I’ve notated below if there were no contacts for parties. Have a good week. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 577 From: kathie walker < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 1:19 PM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. I'm putting together a presentation and need the noise calls for the addresses below from 8/1/2022 to the present. I appreciate your help. 1464 E. Foothill-NONE 190 Stenner-NONE 1290 E. Foothill 700 Grand Ave 1328 E. Foothill-NONE 1326 Higuera-NONE 180 California-NONE 244 California-Noise other only, not a party 615 Grand 280 California 1236 Monte Vista-NONE 720 E. Foothill 1335 E. Foothill 1304 E. Foothill 1292 E. Foothill 584 From:Armas, Sara Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 10:38 AM To:Menesez, Marjorie; CityClerk Subject:RE: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Hi Marjorie, Received, logged and put into Laserfiche! Thanks! Sara Armas pronouns she/her/hers Deputy City Clerk I City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E SArmas@slocity.org T 805.781.7110 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:12 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Hello, Attached is a PRA I received via email on Friday and responded to today. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 From: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:09 AM To: kathie walker < Cc: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Hello again Kathie, Attached are all the contacts we had since 08/01/22. I’ve notated below if there were no contacts for parties. Have a good week. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 From: kathie walker < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 1:19 PM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. 585 I'm putting together a presentation and need the noise calls for the addresses below from 8/1/2022 to the present. I appreciate your help. 1464 E. Foothill-NONE 190 Stenner-NONE 1290 E. Foothill 700 Grand Ave 1328 E. Foothill-NONE 1326 Higuera-NONE 180 California-NONE 244 California-Noise other only, not a party 615 Grand 280 California 1236 Monte Vista-NONE 720 E. Foothill 1335 E. Foothill 1304 E. Foothill 1292 E. Foothill 586 From:kathie walker < Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 10:12 AM To:Menesez, Marjorie Subject:Re: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Thank you! :) On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:08 AM Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> wrote: Hello again Kathie, Attached are all the contacts we had since 08/01/22. I’ve notated below if there were no contacts for parties. Have a good week. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 From: kathie walker < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 1:19 PM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. I'm putting together a presentation and need the noise calls for the addresses below from 8/1/2022 to the present. I appreciate your help. 1464 E. Foothill-NONE 190 Stenner-NONE 1290 E. Foothill 700 Grand Ave 1328 E. Foothill-NONE 1326 Higuera-NONE 180 California-NONE 244 California-Noise other only, not a party 615 Grand 280 California 1236 Monte Vista-NONE 587 720 E. Foothill 1335 E. Foothill 1304 E. Foothill 1292 E. Foothill 588 From:Menesez, Marjorie Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 10:12 AM To:CityClerk Subject:FW: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Attachments:PDUNIFLOW_PD Records Copier_4771_001.pdf Hello, Attached is a PRA I received via email on Friday and responded to today. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 From: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 10:09 AM To: kathie walker < Cc: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities Hello again Kathie, Attached are all the contacts we had since 08/01/22. I’ve notated below if there were no contacts for parties. Have a good week. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 From: kathie walker < Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 1:19 PM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. I'm putting together a presentation and need the noise calls for the addresses below from 8/1/2022 to the present. I appreciate your help. 1464 E. Foothill-NONE 190 Stenner-NONE 1290 E. Foothill 700 Grand Ave 1328 E. Foothill-NONE 1326 Higuera-NONE 180 California-NONE 244 California-Noise other only, not a party 615 Grand 280 California 1236 Monte Vista-NONE 720 E. Foothill 589 1335 E. Foothill 1304 E. Foothill 1292 E. Foothill oe l30 / 24 09:29 NSPY OFF / LOC/ CLEARANCE : Incident address San Luis Obispo Police DePartment NSPY Cl-earnace Data Page: When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 795 l_ 1,290 1.290 FOOTHILL; Io3'1'!": ALPHA PHI; ALPHA PHI; 01:09:57 05 z17 227 05/1,7 /2024 03/]-8/2023 Sandoval, A Inglehart, B NV NV NSPY NSPY oe/30/24 09:31 NSPY OFF / LOC / CLEARANCE : Incident address San Luis Obispo Pol-ice Department NSPY Clearnace Data Page When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 700 GRAND; CHI OMEGA; GRI 20237233 04/24/2023 Rodriguez, G CIT NSPY 795 t_ oe/30/24 09:35 San Luis Obispo Police Department NSPY Clearnace Data 795 1Page: NSPY OFF / LOC/CLEARANCE Incident address When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 244 CALTFORNIA; KAPPA KAP 1-2;3Ot2L 02/28/2023 Sisemore, P QOA NSOT l.-\o Norsl PqKrtJ ,B tl"f I il Norse oalFar-'l 0e /30 / 24 09:37 NSPY OFF /LOC/ CI,EARANCE: Incident address San Luis Obispo Police Department NSPY Clearnace Data Page When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 795 1 61-5 GRAND; SIGMA KAPPAi G 20 20:1"L !0/09/2023 Swart z, c CIT NSPY oe/30/24 09:38 NSPY OFF / LOC / CLEARANCE Incident address San Luis Obispo Police Department NSPY CLearnace Data When reported Page: Responsible off Cle Offe 795 1 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS L"7:72:20 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS L6:04:40 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:30:09 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22240:L9 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:52:16 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 23:04:35 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 23:07:55 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:38:.I7 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:13:40 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:18:36 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:34:59 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 20:38:21 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:L5:42 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22:30:40 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 00:33:44 280 CALIFORNTA; ALPHA EPS 10:43:35 280 CALIFORNIA; ALPHA EPS 22t29:32 =' : o=t1"1t!*Tt1' =o:nT=":t=' 1' 1u: o! 06/08/2024 06/08/2024 os / 31, /2024 05/1,7 /202405/ro/2024 o4/re/2024 02/17 /2024 02/1,0/2024 L2/02/2023 L0/26/2023 Lo/21,/2023 Lo/13/2023 oe/76/2023 05/Le/2023 04/20/2023 03/1,8/zOzZ oL/14/2023 ro/2r/2022 Brewer, D Mangskau, N Gingery, BHerrera, M Cutl-er, B Church, C Ares, iI Fernandez, J Noriega, N Noriega, N .Tohanson, T Crawford, C .Johanson, T Davidson, N Nori-ega, NInglehart, BAres, C Swartz, C CIT NSPY NV NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY NV NSPY NV NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY NV NSPY C]T NSPY NV NSPY CIT NSPY CIT NSPY NV NSPY CIT NSPY oe/30/24 09 :41- NSPY OFF /LOC / CLEARANCE Incident address San Luis Obispo Police Department NSPY Clearnace Data 795 1Page: When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 720 720 720 720 120 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA DELTA =o:"lo= UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL UPSIL 23: L4:25 05:26 1-9:03 23:32 45:22 15:38 73249 53-32 0L:2L 38:20 29 :08 L]-:23 3o: o1 oe/18/2024 06/07/2024 05/oL/2024 02 / 01,/ 2024 1,2/02/2023 1,0/L8/2023 1,0/1,1,/2023 06/08/2023 os/06/2023 04/rr/2023 03/1,1,/2023 03/02/2023 09 / 1,1,/ 2022 Jessen, S Crawford, Mangskau, Ares, .J ilohanson, Etherton, SwarLz, C Sandoval, Stevens, Ares, C .Tohanson, .Tohanson, Swartz, C NSPY NSPY*:n: = 00 23 22 2L 23 NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY N T B CIT NV NV NV CIT CIT NV NV NV NV CIT NV CIT aa. 23:. t_9: 1-2: 22: a'2 . 20: A J T T 720 0e/30/24 09:56 NSPY OFF / LOC / CLEARANCE IncidenE address San Luis Obispo Pol-ice Department NSPY Clearnace Data 795 1Page When reported Responsible off Cle Offe 1335 133s 1335 1335 1335 1335 =tlr: PHT PHI PHI PHI PHI PH] :": KAPPA KAPPA KAPPA KAPPA KAPPA KAPPAy:'i FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; 103'l'1": l-8:50:50 2I:54 z3I 00:53 :28 22 224 z 48 01:05:55 22 :38 :09 23 |4L|33 04/ 01,/2024 1,0/27/2023 03/05/2023 01,/27 /2023 1,2/04/2022 1,0/22/2022 09/28/2022 Cancel- Cox, ,f Mangskau, N Rodriguez, G Peck, D Peck, DTyler, B CAN NSPY NV NSPY CIT NSPY NV NSPY C]T NSPY CIT NSPY =*Y =r:n: = oe/30/24 L0:00 NSPY OFF /LOC / CLEARANCE Incident address San Luis Obispo Police Department NSPY Cfearnace DaLa 795 1Page: When reported Responsible off CIe Offe 13 04 L304 r-3 04 13 04 t_3 04 =t:01 FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; FOOTHILL; lo!'I'1": 1"5:24:2L 2Ll.59 t1"9 22:26:52 22:L5 t 48 23 :76 :57 20:.36:37 05 / rr/ 2024 04/03/2024 02 / 01,/ 2024 12/09/2023 1,0/27 /2022 :o !':/ ?o?' Bravo, D Mangskau, N ,Jarvis, A Perlette, M Ares, C Peck, D S]GMA SIGMA SIGMA SIGMA SIGMA :':T NU; NU; NU; NU; NU; NU; CIT NV CIT NV CIT CIT NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY NSPY 0e/30/24 1-0: 03 NSPY OFF / LOC/ CLEARANCE : Incident address San Luis Obispo PoIice Department NSPY Clearnace DaLa Page When reported Responsible off CIe Offe 795 1 ]-292 1"292 1,292 FOOTHILL; GRID K-05 FOOTHILL; GRID K-05 FOOTHILL; GRID K-06:== L9 :L1":37 00:13 :57 ="='?u:t! oe/2L/2024 1A/ro/2023 2'/=o=/?o?'= Cutler, B Swartz, C ilohnson, NV NSPY CIT NSPY =otr=*:n: L7 = 592 From:Armas, Sara Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 10:05 AM To:Casillas-Rios, Monserath; Padilla, Juan Cc:Hanh, Hannah; Cohen, Rachel; Tway, Timothea (Timmi); Leveille, Brian; Taylor, Callie; CityClerk Subject:Postcards: 10/15/2024 City Council Meeting Attachments:Council Agenda Item Notification Form - Appeal (APPL-0365-2024) Fraternity located at 1264 East Foothill (USE-0331-2023).pdf; Council Agenda Item Notification Form - Initiation of Detachment for Cal Poly Faculty Housing (ANNX-0219-2024, STAB-0038-2024).pdf Hi Monse and Juan, Postcards have been requested for the 10/15/2024 City Council Regular Meeting; reference the attachments for item details. Please draft the postcards no later than noon on Thursday (10/03) and distribute to all cc’d for review. Postcards will need to be mailed by Friday (10/04). Postcards requested for:  Appeal (APPL-0365-2024) Fraternity located at 1264 East Foothill (USE-0331-2023)  Initiation of Detachment for Cal Poly Faculty Housing (ANNX-0219-2024, STAB-0038-2024) Thank you! Sara Armas pronouns she/her/hers Deputy City Clerk I City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E SArmas@slocity.org T 805.781.7110 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications Council Agenda item notification Notification for the Preliminary Agenda is due to the Office of the City Clerk by NOON ON MONDAY – 22 DAYS BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING Email to cityclerk@slocity.org Meeting Date Project Address Application Number Department Head Department Contact Contact Phone & Email Project Description (Legal Description) Public Hearing Business Consent Study Session Verification I (department contact/ project manager) have confirmed that the notification has been created per the requirements indicated above. ________ Initials __________ Date Notification Strategy Legal Notification Is Required (check all that apply) Expanded Outreach (Department Use Only- See PEN MANUAL for Process): Newspaper Legal Ad (Clerk) Postcards to owners and occupants within 300’ (Department provides postcards and notification list to Clerk’s Office) Estimated number of signs _________ (Department Posts) Location Map (Department Provides) Press Release City News Item Email Notification Other Specify: ____________ (Attach list of “stakeholders” for the record.) Council Agenda item notification Notification for the Preliminary Agenda is due to the Office of the City Clerk by NOON ON MONDAY – 22 DAYS BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING Email to cityclerk@slocity.org Meeting Date Project Address Application Number Department Head Department Contact Contact Phone & Email Project Description (Legal Description) Public Hearing Business Consent Study Session Verification I (department contact/ project manager) have confirmed that the notification has been created per the requirements indicated above. ________ Initials __________ Date Notification Strategy Legal Notification Is Required (check all that apply) Expanded Outreach (Department Use Only- See PEN MANUAL for Process): Newspaper Legal Ad (Clerk) Postcards to owners and occupants within 300’ (Department provides postcards and notification list to Clerk’s Office) Estimated number of signs _________ (Department Posts) Location Map (Department Provides) Press Release City News Item Email Notification Other Specify: ____________ (Attach list of “stakeholders” for the record.) 600 From:kathie walker < Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 9:15 AM To:Menesez, Marjorie Subject:Re: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities I'm sorry, Marjorie! I didn't think about you being off on Friday or the weekend etc. because I work on weekends so they're just another day for me. I apologize for not considering that. I look forward to getting the information when you're able. Thanks again and have a nice day! On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 7:33 AM Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> wrote: HI Kathy, no I did not as I don’t work on Fridays. I will not have time to do this right away. I will try to get it done as soon as I can, but please note that we do have 10 days to respond to requests from the date of receipt. I will get back to you soon as I can. 뇤눎눐눑눒눏 Marjorie From: kathie walker < Sent: Monday, September 30, 2024 12:15 AM To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> Subject: Fwd: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Hi Marjorie, I haven't heard back and am wondering if you received this request last week? I'm giving a presentation and am hoping to get the information as soon as possible. Let me know and thank you for your help. -Kathie ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: kathie walker < Date: Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 1:18 PM 601 Subject: Records for noise calls at fraternities and sororities To: Menesez, Marjorie <mmenesez@slocity.org> I'm putting together a presentation and need the noise calls for the addresses below from 8/1/2022 to the present. I appreciate your help. 1464 E. Foothill 190 Stenner 1290 E. Foothill 700 Grand Ave 1328 E. Foothill 1326 Higuera 180 California 244 California 615 Grand 280 California 1236 Monte Vista 720 E. Foothill 1335 E. Foothill 1304 E. Foothill 1292 E. Foothill 602 From:Mezzapesa, John Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 8:18 AM To:Buckley, Nick; Sheats, Steven; Green, Harriet; Salem, Rami; Gorter, James Cc:Loew, Michael Subject:Standard Operating Procedures Hi Team, As we discussed last Tuesday, we will begin an effort to create SOPs and/or work instructions for each unique enforcement process that the Code Enforcement Division undertakes. So far, I have come up with the below list of processes that will either need a unique SOP or work instruction. Harriet is working on creating an SOP template that we can use to develop these. My list is in no way exhaustive, just the first ones that come to mind for me. Please take a moment to review the list and come prepared to discuss how we might organize these processes (or any others you can think of) and which one need to be a unique SOP or can be developed as work instructions within one SOP.  Enforcement of Neighborhood Wellness violations  Enforcement of general Code Enforcement violations  Enforcement of Stormwater Regulations  Enforcement of Shopping Cart Ordinance violations  Enforcement of Graffiti  Enforcement of Unpermitted Homestays & Short Term Rentals  Enforcement of Tree Regulations  Enforcement of Creeks, Tributaries and Riparian Corridor Regulations  Annual Fraternity/Sorority Inspections  Annual Inspection of Post Construction Stormwater Devices  Safe Housing, Multi Unit Inspection per HS 17910.7  Nuisance Abatement Process  Recording on title  Abatement of inoperable vehicles on private property Thanks, John Mezzapesa Interim Deputy Building Official Community Development Building and Safety 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3668 E jmezzapesa@slocity.org T 805.781.7179 610 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Sunday, September 29, 2024 6:47 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8340 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8340 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Friday 10/4/2024 and Sunday 10/6/2024, Fraternity rush events scheduled at this property which is an illegal fraternity in an R-2 zone and the main Chapter house for Phi Sigma Kappa at 348 Hathway Ave. See link for Fall Rush Registration 2024 here: https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo The fraternity's Instagram page also identifies this property at 348 Hathway Ave as the main Chapter house with ongoing events in many posts. https://www.instagram.com/phisigslo/ This request replaces Request #8338 because wrong address was entered on that Request. Thank you. Location: 348 Hathway Avenue To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 2, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 611 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Sunday, September 29, 2024 6:40 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO Message About Request #: 8338 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The requestor added the following information to Request # 8338 Message: The address is 348 Hathway. I will file a separate request with the correct address Request Information Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Location: 3480 South Higuera Street Description: Friday 10/4/2024 & Sunday 10/6/2024, RUSH events scheduled at Illegal main chapter house for fraternity (Phi Sigma Kappa) at 348 Hathway Avenue. See screenshot and link: https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo Expected Close Date: October 2, 2024 Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 612 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Sunday, September 29, 2024 6:03 PM To:Code Enforcement Subject:Ask SLO You have been assigned a new Request #: 8339 Categories:Ask SLO Request This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8339 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to you. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Saturday 10/5/2024, Fraternity rush event scheduled at illegal fraternity satellite house for Phi Sigma Kappa at 1908 Loomis. Posted on Instagram and at link:https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo Fall Rush '24 Schedule Location: 1908 Loomis Street To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Expected Close Date: October 2, 2024 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 613 From:SLO <noreply@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Sunday, September 29, 2024 5:58 PM To:Mezzapesa, John Subject:Ask SLO Notification of new Request #: 8338 This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Request # 8338 from the Government Outreach System has been assigned to Code Enforcement. Request type: Problem Request area: Land Use Violation Citizen name: Description: Friday 10/4/2024 & Sunday 10/6/2024, RUSH events scheduled at Illegal main chapter house for fraternity (Phi Sigma Kappa) at 348 Hathway Avenue. See screenshot and link: https://linktr.ee/phisig.slo Location: 3480 South Higuera Street Expected Close Date: October 2, 2024 Click here to access the request Note: This message is for notification purposes only. Please do not reply to this email. Email replies are not monitored and will be ignored. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 618 From:kathie walker < Sent:Friday, September 27, 2024 9:46 PM To:McDonald, Whitney; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Cc:Mezzapesa, John; Sheats, Steven; Sandra Rowley; Carolyn Smith; Brett Cross; Stewjenkins Info; Victoria Wood; Karen Adler; Steven Walker; E-mail Council Website; Stewart, Erica A; Pease, Andy; Francis, Emily; Shoresman, Michelle; Marx, Jan Subject:Re: Fraternity operations in neighborhoods and CPRA response This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Correction: The Notice of Violation for 1327 E. Foothill was not lost by the CDD but was missing a date, so should not be included in the missing documents listed. The Advisory Letters that were reportedly lost by the Community Development Department (listed on spreadsheet but not included in letters produced) are listed below. My main concern is Kappa Sigma at 281 Hathway, which is the main Chapter house for Kappa Sigma and hosted many documented fraternity events that can be heard from more than a block away. There is ample documentation that 281 Hathway is an active fraternity house, known by SLOPD, and should have been issued a Notice of Violation. Phi Gamma Delta at 1254 Bond is also a problem and is the main Chapter house for the fraternity, listed in Cal Poly's AB 524 report and shown in the documentation from social media posts. 1. Phi Kappa Psi 1740 Fredericks St 2. Phi Kappa Psi 346 Grand Ave 3. Sigma Nu 1621 McCollum St 4. Theta Chi 1661 McCollum St 5. Phi Kappa Psi 237 Albert Dr 6. Phi Gamma Delta 385 Chaplin Ln 7. Kappa Sigma 108 Crandall Wy 8. Theta Chi 1238 E. Foothill Blvd 9. Phi Gamma Delta 1254 Bond St *main Chapter house for the fraternity 10. Theta Chi 191 Kentucky St 11. Kappa Sigma 281 Hathway Ave *main Chapter house for the fraternity 12. Unknown Fraternity 525 El Camino Real 13. Unknown Fraternity 1130 Olive St 14. Unknown Fraternity 618 Felton Wy 15. Used as Event Venue 1010 Paseo DeCaballo Also, I am concerned about the other fraternity houses that were overlooked by Code Enforcement but are listed in Cal Poly's AB 524 Report, and which have hosted rush events and other documented fraternity events. The documentation is attached to my first email. Some of these properties are the main Chapter houses for their fraternity and operate as full-fledged fraternities, as you might imagine that to be. Hopefully, Community Development will solve this ongoing problem. Thank you. -Kathie 619 On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:55 PM kathie walker < wrote: Dear Whitney and Timmi, Nearly a year ago, on 11/8/2023, I met with Timmi Tway and John Mezzapesa to solve the problem of over 60 illegal fraternity houses that have overtaken our neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo. I documented each of the illegal fraternity houses in a report provided during our meeting. Recently, I asked the City for the records sent to the illegal fraternity operations, and the documents, including a spreadsheet of addresses, were sent to me on Monday, 9/22/2024. According to the City, many of the letters sent to the property owners for illegal fraternities were lost by the Community Development Department so were unable to be produced. I am not sure how the City is able to track the illegal operations or follow-up since they've lost the letters. Also, some of the Notices of Violation did not contain a date, therefore the reference to "5 days from this notice" is difficult to enforce because there is no date on the notices. One of the letters also contained the incorrect address because numbers were transposed from 1740 (correct address) to 1704 (address cited in the letter). Finally, the City did not send Notices of Violation or Advisory Letters to many documented fraternities. I have included that information in the document attached to this email. John Mezzapesa has been amazing in working with me. I feel he is overburdened by the amount of work he has to handle and do not blame him for the mistakes that have been made. However, it is apparent that Code Enforcement needs more staff members to handle the problem, and likely others related to substandard housing. I encourage the City Council to keep this need in mind because our neighborhoods are unfairly burdened by the dozens of illegal fraternity houses in residential neighborhoods and it is not right. Aside from the illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhood, no one is monitoring the conditional use permits for existing fraternity operations. After a year of constant parties and disruptive noise starting in 2022, and after they were issued SIX citations including two unruly gatherings within 10 months, my husband filed a complaint against a fraternity's CUP at 280 California Blvd in February. The CUP states that the use permit will be reviewed if a written complaint is made by a resident. I just wanted to let you know that nothing was done. Months went by, the fraternity continued to have loud parties in violation of their CUP and were issued another FIVE citations. My husband and I filed a second complaint against the fraternity. Still, no action has been taken! What is the point of a conditional use permit if the terms of the conditions are not followed? Please follow up with the properties identified in the document attached to this email and let me know what action is being taken regarding the complaints filed against the CUP at 280 California Blvd. Thank you. -Kathie 620 From:kathie walker < Sent:Friday, September 27, 2024 2:56 PM To:McDonald, Whitney; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Cc:Mezzapesa, John; Sheats, Steven; Sandra Rowley; Carolyn Smith; Brett Cross; Stewjenkins Info; Victoria Wood; Karen Adler; Steven Walker; E-mail Council Website; Stewart, Erica A; Pease, Andy; Francis, Emily; Shoresman, Michelle; Marx, Jan Subject:Fraternity operations in neighborhoods and CPRA response Attachments:CDD fraternity action.pdf This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Dear Whitney and Timmi, Nearly a year ago, on 11/8/2023, I met with Timmi Tway and John Mezzapesa to solve the problem of over 60 illegal fraternity houses that have overtaken our neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo. I documented each of the illegal fraternity houses in a report provided during our meeting. Recently, I asked the City for the records sent to the illegal fraternity operations, and the documents, including a spreadsheet of addresses, were sent to me on Monday, 9/22/2024. According to the City, many of the letters sent to the property owners for illegal fraternities were lost by the Community Development Department so were unable to be produced. I am not sure how the City is able to track the illegal operations or follow-up since they've lost the letters. Also, some of the Notices of Violation did not contain a date, therefore the reference to "5 days from this notice" is difficult to enforce because there is no date on the notices. One of the letters also contained the incorrect address because numbers were transposed from 1740 (correct address) to 1704 (address cited in the letter). Finally, the City did not send Notices of Violation or Advisory Letters to many documented fraternities. I have included that information in the document attached to this email. John Mezzapesa has been amazing in working with me. I feel he is overburdened by the amount of work he has to handle and do not blame him for the mistakes that have been made. However, it is apparent that Code Enforcement needs more staff members to handle the problem, and likely others related to substandard housing. I encourage the City Council to keep this need in mind because our neighborhoods are unfairly burdened by the dozens of illegal fraternity houses in residential neighborhoods and it is not right. Aside from the illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhood, no one is monitoring the conditional use permits for existing fraternity operations. After a year of constant parties and disruptive noise starting in 2022, and after they were issued SIX citations including two unruly gatherings within 10 months, my husband filed a complaint against a fraternity's CUP at 280 California Blvd in February. The CUP states that the use permit will be reviewed if a written complaint is made by a resident. I just wanted to let you know that nothing was done. Months went by, the fraternity continued to have loud parties in violation of their CUP and were issued another FIVE citations. My husband and I filed a second complaint against the fraternity. Still, no action has been taken! What is the point of a conditional use permit if the terms of the conditions are not followed? 621 Please follow up with the properties identified in the document attached to this email and let me know what action is being taken regarding the complaints filed against the CUP at 280 California Blvd. Thank you. -Kathie Phi Sigma Kappa 348 & 350 Hathway Avenue (“the Pink House”) Phi Sigma Kappa’s “ back house at 350 Hathway Ave It is on the same parcel but recognized as separate address for citations, so they are divided between 348 and 350 Hathway Phi Sigma Kappa’s “ back house at 350 Hathway Ave listed in AB 524 Report 17 Phi Sigma Kappa 1908 Loomis Street Phi Sigma Kappa’s “ back house at 1908 Loomis listed in AB 524 Report Video on Phi Sigma Kappa’s Instagram page identifies 1908 Loomis St as the satellite house Rush event at 1908 Loomis 10/12/2023 18 Pi Kappa Phi 66 Rafael Way 19 Pi Kappa Phi 447 N. Chorro Pi Kappa Phi winter rush 2024 Rush event at 447 N. Chorro 10/11/2023 20 Sigma Nu 290 Chaplin Lane Fraternity members in front of their house at 290 Chaplin Lane This fraternity house hosted several events with sororities, during the 2023-2024 academic year, including a party with over 100 people on 10/27/2023 The party will likely be listed on Cal Poly’s AB 524 report posted 10/1/2024 21 Theta Chi 1350 Stafford Street Theta Chi rush event posted on Instagram at 1350 Stafford 10/11/2023 Photo of Theta Chi Board Members at 1350 Stafford The house at 1350 Stafford became a fraternity in academic year 2023 – 2024 It has held MANY fraternity parties, hosting sororities, and has been extremely disruptive in the neighborhood. Most parties were cleared by SNAP as ‘negative violation’ despite being heard from a block away 22 Theta Chi 410 Grand Avenue Screenshot of Theta Chi at 410 Grand from Theta Chi’s rush promotion video posted on Instagram. This was a new fraternity house in 2023 – 2023 academic year and hosted many events and parties that would appear on Cal Poly’s AB 524 Report to be posted on 10/1/2024 23 Zeta Beta Tau 654 Graves The main Chapter house for Zeta Beta Tau is one of the few fraternity houses identified in Cal Poly’s AB 524 report as “Affiliated Chapter Houses” at 654 Graves Ave. This is the main Chapter facility for Zeta Beta Tau. 654 Graves is also listed multiple times in the “sanctioned events” for the fraternity in the AB 524 report. 24 Zeta Beta Tau 244 Albert Drive a.k.a. “The Zoo” Zeta Beta Tau held “sanctioned events” at 244 Albert Drive including a St. Fratty’s Day event that was shut down by SLOPD with a Report filed by the officer re: the event. A photo of the Backyard at 244 Albert Dr is used by Zeta Beta Tau to recruit new members (below) 25 Zeta Beta Tau 244 Albert Drive 244 Albert Drive, referred to as “the Zoo” had an event with a live band on January 12, 2024, and a music video for the band was filmed during the concert in the backyard. The band posted clips from the concert at 244 Albert on their Instagram page (below) 26 No Date on Notice of Violation 1525 Slack Street – Sigma Pi 27 No Date on Notice of Violation 1327 E. Foothill Blvd – Beta Theta Pi 28 Wrong address cited in letter (should be 1740 not 1704) 1740 Fredericks Street – Phi Kappa Psi 29 The City’s spreadsheet (page 2) shows Notices of Violation and Advisory Letters were sent to the following addresses, but the City claims the letters were “lost” by the Community Development Department. How will the City have a record of the violation and/or follow-up since the letters are lost? Lost Notice of Violation: 1. Beta Theta Pi 1327 E. Foothill Blvd *main Chapter house for the fraternity Lost Advisory Letters: 2. Kappa Sigma 1861 Hope St3. Phi Kappa Psi 1740 Fredericks St4. Phi Kappa Psi 346 Grand Ave5. Sigma Nu 1621 McCollum St6. Theta Chi 1661 McCollum St7. Phi Kappa Psi 237 Albert Dr8. Phi Gamma Delta 385 Chaplin Ln9.Kappa Sigma 108 Crandall Wy10. Theta Chi 1238 E. Foothill Blvd11. Phi Gamma Delta 1254 Bond St12. Theta Chi 191 Kentucky St13. Kappa Sigma 281 Hathway Ave *main Chapter house for the fraternity14. Unknown Fraternity 525 El Camino Real15. Unknown Fraternity 1130 Olive St16. Unknown Fraternity 618 Felton Wy17. Used as Event Venue 1010 Paseo DeCaballo 30 623 From:McDonald, Whitney Sent:Friday, September 27, 2024 11:38 AM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Subject:RE: Update on meeting with AEPi Fraternity Very helpful, thank you!! From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 11:37 AM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: Update on meeting with AEPi Fraternity Hi Whitney, I wanted to provide you with an update on the Alpha Epsilon Pi (AEPi) fraternity issue, as this may come up at the RQN event this weekend. This is the fraternity for which we received a written complaint from a member of the public, citing the condition in the 1983 CUP that requires the ComDev director to refer the CUP to the planning commission upon receipt of a verified complaint. Code enforcement sent several letters and notices of violation to the fraternity and verified a number of noise citations that were issued to the fraternity by the police department. The most recent letter from Community Development requested that the fraternity leadership contact ComDev and set up a meeting to discuss their CUP. I met with the fraternity (along with code enforcement and planning) yesterday, and had a productive conversation where we talked to them about what their CUP is, what regulations they must follow, and next steps. I believe we have done our due diligence in verifying that violations occurred, and warning the fraternity that they were violating their use permit, and I would like to schedule the CUP for review by the PC before the end of the year. We discussed that this is likely to happen with the fraternity, and they understood. This is also a chance for us to bring this outdated CUP into conformance with our more recent CUPs. I will still need to reach out to the property owner to talk through the PC hearing, they are aware of the issues, but ultimately this is their CUP and they should understand what is going on. I figured this may come up this weekend, so hopefully this info is helpful. Please let me know if you have questions! Thanks, Timothea (Timmi) Tway Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 625 From:Tracy L. Watson <twatson@calpoly.edu> Sent:Friday, September 27, 2024 8:24 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:Re: bylaws Attachments:SCLC MOU-2023-24-FINAL_SCLCApproved.pdf This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Good morning Christine, They are not currently on the website, but if you think it would be beneficial, they can be added. I've attached a copy. Let me know if you need anything else. Have a fantastic weekend. Tracy Watson She/Her Administrative Assistant II, Student Government Associated Students, Inc. California Polytechnic State University 1 Grand Ave. San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0675 P: 805-756-1292 | F: 805-756-6166 asi.calpoly.edu Cal Poly sits on the traditional lands of the yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini Northern Chumash Tribe of San Luis Obispo County and Region. The yak titʸu titʸu yak tiłhini have a documented presence in this area for over 10,000 years. The tiłhini peoples have stewarded their ancestral and unceded homelands which include all of the cities, communities, federal and state open spaces within the San Luis Obispo County region. These homelands extend East into the Carrizo Plains toward Kern County, South to the Santa Maria River, North to Ragged Point, and West beyond the ocean’s shoreli ne in an unbroken chain of lineage, kinship, and culture. From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 4:08 PM To: Tracy L. Watson <twatson@calpoly.edu> Subject: bylaws Hi Tracy, Can I get a copy of the SCLC bylaws please? Or a link to where it lives on the website? Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org 626 T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 Memorandum of Understanding Between California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), Associated Students, Inc. of California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo (ASI), the Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC), the City of San Luis Obispo, and the County of San Luis Obispo Regarding the Student-Community Liaison Committee 2023-24 This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into between Cal Poly, the Associated Students, Inc. of California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo (ASI), the Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC), the City of San Luis Obispo (City) and the County of San Luis Obispo (County). Background: The Student Community Liaison Committee (SCLC) was formed in the spring of 1987 to serve as a mechanism of communication among Cal Poly, the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Obispo community, to develop and strengthen town gown relationships to address issues regarding the community and Cal Poly students. It was envisioned that the chair should be the Cal Poly student body president to demonstrate parity between students and city officials. In 1988, SCLC was expanded to include representation from Cuesta College. Thanks to the support from several areas (City Departments, Chamber of Commerce, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, and other Cal Poly organizations), SCLC was acknowledged as a key link in communication between students and the City & County of San Luis Obispo. Term: This Agreement is effective on October 19, 2023, and will automatically renew each year successively unless terminated by either party upon written notice prior to the expiration of the then current renewal term. The agreement will be distributed prior to the first meeting of the new academic year and subsequently reviewed for changes annually at the first SCLC meeting of the academic year. Purpose: The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to outline the structure of SCLC and responsibilities of all parties represented within the SCLC. SCLC is to serve as a mechanism for communication between Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo, and community organizations within San Luis Obispo. SCLC will serve to proactively engage in discussions and actions to promote positive relations, mutual respect, and improved quality of life for all members of the San Luis Obispo community. Objective of the SCLC: In order to achieve our purpose, SCLC will: Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 • Educate student and non-student residents in the community about cooperative methods to improve neighborhood relations. • Promote the positive aspects of campus and community co-existence and interaction. • Encourage increased participation, collaboration, and involvement in activities on campus and in the community. • Serve as a public forum on student/community related issues. • Advise City government bodies or other community organizations on City issues through consultative review. • Share information about the campuses and community to strengthen relationships and enhance quality of life for all residents of San Luis Obispo. • Problem solving through collaborative exploration and implementation of meaningful solutions to pertinent issues. Open Meeting Act Adherence: As a group comprising a variety of elected officials, the SCLC is committed to adhering to the Brown Act, also known as the Brown Open Meeting Act. Under the Brown Act, the SCLC will conduct its meetings openly, providing advance notice to the public, allowing public attendance, and enabling public comment on relevant matters. The group will also maintain accurate records of meetings. By following the Brown Act, the SCLC upholds the principles of transparency and public participation, fostering trust and accountability within the community it serves. Parliamentarian Procedure Formal parliamentary procedure is not required for the conduct of meetings, and the chair has the discretion to determine the appropriate level of formality for each meeting. Voice Votes Voice votes shall be required for the following matters: a) Approval of SCLC Meeting Minutes b) Approval of the SCLC MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) c) Appointment or removal of members d) Budget allocations The chair shall ensure that roll call votes are conducted in an orderly manner, and the results shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. Meetings: Shall be held monthly at a set and recurring time, with the exception of December, June and July, unless otherwise noted in the annual calendar or at the discretion of the chair. Attendance Member absences. If a properly notified voting member of the committee fails, for any reason, to attend or be represented by a recognized proxy at four or more regularly scheduled meetings within the annual term of the committee, they are automatically to be considered for replacement by the members of the committee. The member shall be notified after the third missed meeting. Resignation In the event a member finds it necessary to resign from the committee, a letter of resignation stating the effective date of resignation shall be requested. Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 Agenda Format: • Call to order • Approval of minutes • Open Forum • Reports: o Chair/Vice Chair o San Luis Obispo City Manager o Neighborhood Wellness Civility Report o Residents for Quality Neighborhoods o Community Representative Reports • Old Business • New Business • Voting Member Reports (1 minute) • Announcements • Adjournment SCLC Officers: Chair • Shall be the current ASI President • Shall facilitate SCLC meetings. • Shall provide an agenda and minutes for each meeting. • Appoint subcommittee chairs. Vice Chair • Shall be the current ASCC President • Assume responsibility for chair in their absence. Membership: Voting members shall include representatives from Cal Poly, ASI, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo County, and designated representatives for the San Luis Obispo community. *All voting members may designate proxy except for the chair and vice chair positions. Cal Poly • Dean of Students • Interfraternity Council representative • Panhellenic Council representative • United Sorority and Fraternity Council representative ASI • Associated Students, Inc. (ASI) President • Student-at-Large (appointed by ASI President) • ASI Executive Director Cuesta College • ASCC President • Dean, Student Success and Support Programs/South County Center • Student-at-Large, appointed by ASCC • ASCC Advisor City of San Luis Obispo • Mayor • City Manager • Police Chief • Police Public Affairs Manager Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 County of San Luis Obispo • Board of Supervisors representative Community • Community members-at-large • Geographic Neighborhoods Association/Group representatives • Residents for Quality Neighborhoods representative Community Partners • SLO Solutions/Creative Mediation representative Representatives Role within the SCLC: Cal Poly shall: • Provide the following voting representatives: Dean of Students, or designee, (1) Interfraternity Council representative, (1) Panhellenic Council representative, (1) United Sorority and Fraternity Council representative. • Participate in education of community for improving student/community relations. ASI shall: • Provide chairperson for the SCLC, in the form of the elected ASI President. • Provide the following voting representatives: (1) Student-at-Large, ASI Executive Director, or designee. • Coordinate meeting schedule for the SCLC, including subcommittee meetings, socials, etc. as necessary. • Coordinate annual goal setting workshop in support of the SCLC purpose. • Provide basic administrative support for meeting minutes, handouts, and other committee documents. Cuesta College/ASCC shall: • Provide the vice chair for the SCLC, in the form of the elected ASCC President. • Provide the following voting representatives: (1) Student-at-large, ASCC Advisor, and the Vice President of Student Services, or designee. • Support the functions of the SCLC Chair in coordinating meetings, subcommittees, and annual workshops, such as transition, as needed. • Participate in education of community for strengthening student/community relations. City of San Luis Obispo shall: • Provide meeting space for monthly meetings. • Provide the following voting representatives: San Luis Obispo Mayor, San Luis Obispo City Manager, San Luis Obispo Police Chief, and San Luis Obispo Police Public Affairs Manager, or designee. • Provide the following non-voting representatives: One City Council representative, or designee. • Participate in education of community for strengthening student/community relations. County of San Luis Obispo shall: • Provide the following voting representatives: (1) San Luis Obispo County Supervisor, or designee, whose district includes the City of San Luis Obispo. • Provide other non-voting San Luis Obispo County support staff as available through the office of the participating Supervisor. • Participate in education of community for strengthening student/community relations. Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 San Luis Obispo Residents for Quality Neighborhoods shall: • Provide (1) voting representative from Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, or designee to serve on SCLC. • Participate in education of community for strengthening student/community relations. Community Partners shall: • SLO Solutions/Creative Mediation shall provide (1) voting representative, or designee to serve on the SCLC. • Provide input, guidance, and awareness of important resources for managing and mitigating community conflict around issues that immerge between student/community relationships. SCLC shall nominate and appoint (by a majority vote): • At least one (1) and no more than five (5) voting community members-at-large selected from the following: o A recognized City of San Luis Obispo Geographic Neighborhood Association/Group and/or. o A City of San Luis Obispo community member with an expressed interest, demonstrated impact, or in immediate proximity to either Cal Poly University or Cuesta College. • These members shall participate in education of community for strengthening student/community relations and the work and goals of SCLC in the SLO community. Annual Budget: In order to carry out the mission of the SCLC, funding from the following representatives is provided on an annual basis. ASI will send invoices to each representative following the approval of the MOU. Funds collected will be held by ASI. All funding appropriation decisions require approval by the SCLC. Funds are intended, but not limited to support SCLC marketing materials, annual events, grants for projects that promote community wellbeing, and meeting supplies. Budget funds not used in a fiscal year will rollover to the next fiscal year. Approved by the SCLC on February 15, 2024 Representative Amount: Cal Poly ASI Cuesta College/ASCC City of San Luis Obispo (City Council/Mayor, City Administrator, San Luis Obispo Police Department) County of San Luis Obispo (Two members of the Board of Supervisors) $500 In-Kind (administrative support) $500 $500 $500 In witness whereof, this Memorandum of Understanding has been executed by the parties hereto as of the date first above written. Sam Andrews ASI President Associated Students, Inc. California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA Zach Stever ASCC President Associated Students of Cuesta College San Luis Obispo, CA Dr. Joy Pedersen Dean of Students California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA Derek Johnson City Manager San Luis Obispo, CA Michelle Crawford ASI Executive Director Associated Students, Inc. California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA Dr. Maria T. Escobedo, Dean Student Success and Support Programs/South County Center Associated Students of Cuesta College San Luis Obispo, CA Erica A. Stewart Mayor San Luis Obispo, CA Debbie Arnold County of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 627 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2024 3:37 PM To:Scott, Rick Subject:CMAST Attachments:ITGA 2024 Presentation.pdf Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Bring About Positive Change Through the Ultimate Town-Gown Experiences: Chief David B. Mitchell, UMD Police Department James Bond, Director of UMD Office of Student Conduct Derek Daves, Code Enforcement Supervisor, City of College Park Lisa Miller, President of Prince George’s Property Owners Association (PGPOA) & College Living, LLC Major James Keleti, Prince George’s County Police Department 1 CMAST (City Multi-Agency Services Team)and the Knock & Talk Program Overview 1.Background: College Park, MD 2.Challenges –The “Why” 3.Initiatives embracing collaboration: CMAST and Knock & Talks 4.Role of Office of Student Conduct 5.Program Outcomes 6.Q&A BACKGROUND Welcome To College Park, MD BACKGROUND Home of The University of Maryland Challenges -The “Why” ●Off-campus student conduct ●House parties ●Trash and litter ●Noise complaints ●Underage drinking ●Disorderly conduct ●To name a few… 5 Initiatives embracing collaboration: CMAST and Knock & Talks 6 CMAST: City Multi-Agency Services Team 7 Purpose and mission: ●CMAST is a partnership with all stakeholders within College Park ●Data-driven approach to community-oriented problem solving ●Goal is to combine multiple agencies’ information, resources, and expertise to target and address issues in the community ●Collaborating for the mutual benefit of UMD/College Park citizens, students, faculty, staff, businesses, and visitors CMAST Members 8 •Having all the right players at the table is key •Over 30 representatives attend from various organizations •University of Maryland, College Park •Div. of Administration •Office of Student Conduct •Div. of Student Affairs •Dept. of Resident Life •Dept. of Fraternity and Sorority Life •University Health Center •Office of the Fire Marshal •Dept. of Environmental Safety •Athletics •Student Government Association CMAST Members 9 •University of Maryland Police Dept. •Chief of Police •Special Events Unit •Information Analysis Unit •Community Outreach Unit •Prince George’s County Police Dept. •Division I Commander •Community Oriented Policing Services •Prince George’s County Fire/EMS •College Park Volunteer Fire Dept. •City of College Park •City Manager •Code Enforcement •Contract Cars •Prince George’s Property Owners Association •Prince George’s County Liquor Board •The Hotel at UMD •College Park City Council •State’s Attorney’s Office Sample CMAST Agenda XXXX Presentation of Crime Information ●The UMPD Information Analysis Unit (IAU) and PGPD analysts work together to summarize and analyze the monthly data for presentation ○Case and call data ○Monthly crime maps ●Current data is key 11 ●If there is an address with multiple calls and events, it is reported by IAU and discussed in the monthly meeting ●College Park Code Enforcement, PGPD, UMPD, and/or others provides their interaction with the address and when appropriate, fines/refers to UMD Office of Student Conduct (OSC) ●OSC meets with the residents and reviews the complaints and policies ●Prince George’s Property Owners Association (PGPOA) provides any information that may be needed regarding the resident and/or actions the property owners have taken ●PGPOA speaks with property owners to help them navigate better outcomes ●Other actions are taken as appropriate i.e. a house visit by Code Enforcement, contact owner or property manager Working Together: Repeat Party Houses 12 Knock & Talks What is it? Where did the idea come from? 13 Knock & Talks ●The “Knock & Talks” program involves an inter-agency team going door-to- door at known “problem houses” 14 Purpose and mission: ●To discuss city and university policies and expectations with students in a friendly manner ●To establish a positive interaction with police and code enforcement ●To give students resources and off campus living information ●To explain consequences of misbehavior ●Timing is crucial –after most students have moved in, but before school starts Lessons Learned: Group Size 15 ●Initially the “Knock & Talk” groups consisted of many people ●In recent years, the groups have been downsized to increase engagement ○One member of UMPD ○One member of PGPD ○One member of the College Park Code Enforcement Division ○One member of the Office of Student Conduct ●Additionally, police officers wear “soft” uniforms Lessons Learned: Coverage 16 ●Maximizing efficiency and impact ○2-3 teams ○First 3 nights of the school year ○Goal is 100 houses ○Additional visits throughout the year as needed for problem houses Goodie Bags with Resources 17 ●City of College Park Resident Guide ●Safety information from police ●Code of Student Conduct information sheet ●UMD Community Engagement information ●Property Owners Association information ●Pens, magnets, hand sanitizer, etc. History of Student Conduct and Town-Gown Relations ●Senate approved the expansion of the Code of Student Conduct in 2013 ●Stemmed from growing concern of student behavior off campus ●Provided another layer of support University could provide to students ●OSC staff participated in several meetings with city and neighborhood groups to prepare for it ●Discussions with student governance organizations also occurred 18 OSC and Knock & Talks 19 ●OSC Staff join the visits to student-resident houses at the start of the academic year ●Residents determined by C.E.Os and their tracking of addresses where issues were reported during the previous year ●Provides an opportunity for us to get to know residents and make up of the houses (e.g. satellite house for student org., class standings, etc. ) OSC and CMAST ●OSC serves as a member of City Multi Agency Services Team ●Liaison groups like this have proven invaluable in addressing concerns where several stakeholders are involved ●OSC provides statistics and trend data for discussion purposes Behavioral Concerns and How They’re Addressed 20 Year # of Students 2018-2019 229 2019-2020 345 2020-2021 572 2021-2022 174 2022-2023 121 2023-2024 133 *Sources include family and anonymous reports Behavioral Concerns 21 Top 5 Violations: 1.Disorderly behavior -1,090 2.Alcohol use or possession -379 3.Physical Harm -150 4.Alcohol Distribution -121 5.Hazing -103 OSC Process* and Potential Sanctions 22 Potential Sanctions •Warning •Disciplinary Probation •Suspension Withheld •Suspension •Expulsion •Educational Sanctions (reflection paper, etc.) •Restitution *OSC is beginning to incorporate Restorative Practices as an alternative to the disciplinary process. Program Outcomes ●At the beginning of CMAST, there were large numbers of addresses that were repeat offenders ●We have gone from over 10 houses brought up in meetings to many months with no houses ●In the past year, there have been fewer than 3 repeat disruptive houses 23 Example of 2014 data: 24 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ●After doing the preventative Knock & Talks and CMAST meetings for several years, the number of repeat disorder addresses were reduced 25 Example of 2019 data: Jan 2019: None Feb 2019: None Mar 2019: None Apr 2019: None May 2019: None Aug 2019: None Sep 2019: None Nov 2019: XXXX Columbia Ave XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ●Most recently available data after 13 years of UMD, PGPD, City of College Park, and PGPOA working together: 26 Example of 2024 data: January 2024 February 2024: None March 2024: None April 2024 XXXX XXXX ●Proactive policing ●Creating positive communication between police and community ●Bridging gaps between university students, the community and police ●Giving a voice to and fostering lasting partnerships with community members and business owners ●Making our community safer to work, live, and play ●There is no downside! Community Feedback 27 Q&A ●Do you think either or both of these programs would benefit your community? ●What further information do you need to be able to implement this in your own community? Thank You @UMPD University of Maryland Police Department @UMDPoliceDept www.umpd.umd.edu 301-405-3555 Chief David Mitchell –chief@umpd.umd.edu James Bond -jebond@umd.edu Derek Daves -ddaves@collegeparkmd.gov Lisa Miller -lisa@terprealestate.com Major James Keleti -jskeleti@co.pg.md.us