Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/05/2007, - PROPOSED REVISED HEIGHT LIMITS AND LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS DOWNTOWN. 6/5/7 CC presentation Ly Pete Evans (2151551), 204G .<uchel St, SLO Re: Proposed revised height limits and large scale developments downtown. The basic and critical issue is the public is uninformed and unaware of the scope and gravity of impending developments and zoning changes. The CC is either glad about this or should take steps to make sure the residents are fully informed and engaged in the process. Obscure, confusing and/or boring announcements do not fully satisfy the obligation of government to involve the citizens in important planning decisions. A group of concerned residents has undertaken to address this deficit in accountable stewardship, and requests our representatives ours, not the representatives of wealthy developers who hope to line their pockets with our resources) to adopt, a public awareness program before proceeding with these large-scale downtown developments-and the oh-so convenient increased height limits that suit their plans! Members of this group have raised these issues with residents and tourists- most have been horrified to learn we may lose some of our 'charming' character, viewscape, sunny sidewalks and the considerable number of small business locations that add so much to our attraction. No one wants this town to look like Chicago, New York or other large metropolises. So what is all this about? Can you tell us what we get out of this? Some citizens have been criticized by certain officials for commenting on these issues, supposedly because they.were 'late in the game'. If so I would suggest those officials should quit their position. We have, and will invoke the right, to comment at any stage and for any purpose that protects what we have here. You were not elected to aid or support large developments-you are here for one purpose-to act as our representatives and do all in your power to make sure you are acting in our interests. You are on the verge of making major, long lasting and precedent setting changes to this town. I think you are very mistaken if you think the people are with you. Many feel you are hoping this can all be pulled off with little fanfare. i A One little thing you can do to inform passersby is to order the various developers to install storey poles at each site designating the actual scope of the proposed buildings. Expensive, awkward? Too bad, that isn't our problem. I see very few local people will benefit from these grandiose plans you are fiddling with. And no average people will. If you wish to engage the public in this-then engage the public. I would also suggest you call a series of town hall meetings focused only on this issue. The average Joe relishes attending a CC meeting and waiting for hours for their issue to come up about as much as getting a root canal. There is so much to say: your LUE, General Plan, Housing Element and other documents are littered with comments that are seemingly ignored by these developments. We need town hall meetings to discuss this to the satisfaction of the public-your employer. City of Portola Valley, Ca. http://www.portolavalley.net/buiIding/bpe_planninqfag.shtmI Planning Fags-from their version of our ARC # 14 When do I need storey poles? When your application is before the ASCC for review, the perimeter of all proposed structures should be clearly staked and labeled on the site, in addition the ASCC may ask that you show the actual bulk of the proposed structure with storey poles. City of SLO Public Participation Outline, 1/25/88 City recognizes that: Public Participation is important Key purpose is to tap public sentiment Citizen survey should be undertaken arsiss PETITION s`'��`" ' �y TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: ��� �as�f� . We, the undersigned resident of t e City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone 1. - B 2. , 3. `1 a)' a h a U 2Ss UM6Sct 4. aor ON&i a 5. 6 6. /'7 36� � rri� 7292� s. e- S' e - s. e' -55W ' ,� S� 5to S • Zx7, 10. �it 1 h I Date Name . Address Phone 12' `',►CaMrau L.c 3d~rLT o. S;���&-� i?.5—O +�u���i+ s44—g ivy 13. 7774c / SL 14. Are A46iL #754 AWNAe .f4#1w?4 rte 1 At .A J.15. oc 16. 012027 415 IMMI 910 SYLI S1-I2.0 18. 5-R-07 a6f:;, We-V.af d..W /6yMu�,nrtve- X77— 3731 19. !a 200 MA ,J s",B -772-4D7 20. 2 fv1 Zv DScup Lu"5 r_ 5 s - b 22. 23. c7S= --3 �lLs (Amfte k SL-0 ?833) 24. S' :2 :7 A (fcS �a Loa LSC 5.)-%-L, ill 25. S-L y"o z Z O. 235 - PeYS2 26. S'2- P a (. A l 27. 4/c-X. Gi4 � lt7ic c c2 �r `l �ycle;s�s.� CF 7b3 /7f Z 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41- 42. 2 Date Na. Addre Phone 12. 51-2,n/07 I rJr�ve_ �i.c�! 6c6-- lsc 13. SL 2->4/07 J t_e..c�- v o �� 9 cu ++S�Jrcnrs�c f P 7? 15. 16. 17. %-"12.,4 nlcy Iain Lktw Si- S L.0 18. 4' !Wkl IUD 19. wlN 20. 3ti(u 1 1 w� _ 21. J v a 3 - s! 3 22. G 0761, C CI 23. AAA C-4zc(r-n 16 `I S )AAoJ S94 JCaJ. SI,v syl -jZiy 24. 11 �ZZ `1G SD sw 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. l Date Name Address Phone 43. 6E2!Z hk AOO &-'F, t5yzt��4 A �7.-A yW-", 44. -2 "ZO AlArAm., / S" 3.,P30 45. 48. 49. 50. 51. - - - --- - - 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. - ---- -- ----- - 57. 58. 59. 60. - - 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. - - - 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 3 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents 0ifteC4ty of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September.or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address; Phone 2. L r D L 4,. 16a /7 a e c/t f 5. -) -/-7-o7 &t4 rw[se- 6. :Hrfzi w ►r it 2 oTo A Sw r+Z 5 T 7. 5"/7-07th 8. 7 r8��1 �,,� G�l�,; "e 2 SNP s. - ' ( es 11. ! -Qil � �raolo '.L.O. c A q3AIo 1 I 1 Date Name /� Address Phone 12. � / (M -/ � d 136 X,�. 2ss� 8as- syo- y s 14. ` 15. TTS--76 16. v (QZ9 t t %, ( 17. �,den 'a.,r- : 18. A.Vqlti qW lmq&coul:�- VD 54 19. S (ah 153MO r\t 8VP o1 bye C*• S Lo CPr 93 y61 fs-2o �G 36 20. YW14VW LDS 35G SLO. , CA mitts- g65 ll 21.c q37 AlueleY SSU Cf} Q346) 22. E �3 cA 1343G 735- /R. 17 23. 24. I so Z 25. L4,AA s $ak x �rK .c S 26. 3 d7 ak� 19-6�C,,% le 27.- 5� 8/�7 q 29 /1/; an,o s/. 1 28. S 11; b`7 1350 (boG ( zs j,3 24751 29. 0 71 510- 17 30. S�d5 a 3 2 31. 5Is°t!a'1 L C:o�le� xg]�J ooh AaL ,l„tS �1 � 32. 5I/y��7btlh� { li IZD�Suk-�ar�rxro�5�- 511 �1�9�> ° 33. 5I Ig d-- N i k4 5S5 Z m&c, ,P r'. 5 L 00 01910 5 (42s)5z/5 34. 51 1"\ 10+ Mali\yr... ),,j �t amlCobles g3y33 (700404 - L(6c 35. SIZo107 ff 4O weac/ PIC ���c 2- 36.36. 0 C7 l(3S Z 5 Z 37. s S`c v. 30 S 4-Ol 38. S 23 7 , suo ;� b 39. � 2� D7 EUELN . 1/ot_c.MLR NSF.�ni LA tit SCO 40. S •ti 41. -<�t C 3CC) - 60 42. NT, . len In-ri 2 Date Name Address Phone 43. 5 Q 1 R 2r\o n 2 U r��W COOyitUs . it a. .Q(3�tZ 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. . 71. 72. 73. 3 ^ � _ � � . � �.T_ -' ,� _ .��} 'T.. �. 7 _ � ` �`- +��` f• , :,. 1 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would.enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone 1- 223 s 2. ZJj4 7 4-1 ey 4. �� ° �,�/lL,. 1 1 RSA c,��'e '�. s L o Syy-Z3d3 5. ��„ x`9-9 18 5 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 1 CpuNe / W"} G June 5. 2007 Save Our Downtown Petitions To: The Mavor and Members of the City Council of San Luis Obispo California The enclosed copies of petitions are signed by voters who are residents, workers or visitors to San Luis Obispo. These 440+ signatures were collected at Farmer's Market, Scolari's, the Palm Theatre, Antiques on Monterey, door-to-door, and other venues. Signers are property owners and renters, downtown business people and workers, long- time multigenerational residents and newcomers to the county, doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, historians, archaeologists,professors and students, former and current members of advisory boards and employees [past and present]of your own city. I testify that all these signatures were collected by persons who are "members" of the Save Our Downtown committee. These have only been collected in the last ten days. More signatures of this petition are coming and will be forwarded to you. We are requesting that you hold off making further decisions on issues affecting downtown development including height codes and historic property demolition or relocation - until October- because many affected residents will be on vacation during the summer and as constituents you will want [or not want] to hear what they have to say. We know you want to leave the proper legacy for your children and future generations. You have a choice of doing what is correct, or what you think is friendly to just a few - in fact the consultants hired by the Downtown Business Association in 2002 and the survey in 2000 of"1000" local citizens both talked about the sense of place, local quaintness, and thriving downtown which we hope you won't brush aside in the name of"progress.". My signature notarized-this date June 5, 2007 R.J. "Boz'Schrage 1 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of,,5a_V_t bb ono ff On JLax .2 S ��`7 before me, ji l' �L/i n.a► I�o'Mr.4 ��b�l L Dae L Name anti T e of Unicer(e.g.,-JarDoe.Notary Public personally appeared f2,0��etI T J'ejr,� Sc�, fNam )q1+_ of Signers) ❑ personally known to me ,X(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(,$)'whose nameA is4we subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sf executed the same in hisate4/tx1etr authorized JILL HOVING capacity4i<, and that by hisftT&t *ir signaturee4Won the LoConvinmuon& 16n279 instrument the persorXea, or the entity upon behalf of Mo1ay Arc Ca6tardo _ which the person,(eacted, executed the instrument. Qat LUIS Obbpo Cauady SokoUN� � �'�1 WITNESS my hand and official seal. Place Notary Seal Above ;)AJ 4 t_'C�Q Signature of Notary Publi OPT/ONA Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. De tion of Attached Document Title or Ty f Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Abo - Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: igner's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ 'vidual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑Corp a Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General _ ❑ Partner — Limited ❑ General ❑ Attomey in Fact Top of thumb here El Attorney In Fa Top of thumb here E) Trustee ❑Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: 0 2006 National Notary Association-9350 De Soto Ave..P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth.CA 91313-2602 Item No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free i-800-876-6827 / f Date Name Address Phone /V 12. YYII cvti.. �1�1i✓nY /7 - /" o? o�` 13. ' hOaKOA PaYK:Iftn (b&Z til r\ ,'O, e-. CffUS rl 15. 5-Z b= .' f 27 c 1s. �- 31 �0� ,� r �oq� /�io��d ! `Lo 3 0l 17. 1 t "o ( Zc5- hMa4 ST. 18. 0, br 5� L At[U 19. 3o �ri/�(sa-ca.� � Sd� � SLO `l3bS 20. 5 - - Co ri L L b 3 .o /,•,.ns 9y JPS T3 z1 Yy 21. ��;� 87 N•e� �r�ef�el". �2� ! G'^dpi q ?c1o1 tik--7 (� 22. -5 MAdrorLA �.or�R SL�_g34 0 23. 5/'3t/ 7'w. �Jz,ly' �c�-h 10S� 5e q.iP► o. SLo 134a 7 24. l3lly Ddu ---3 m mm r� 93� 25. V31 0 I [$U aff S e 0 26. S o 1 1 sco CA 93PI 27. 28. 5t/-31 LO 7 kle . 29. 31 D- _ - - . r (") lz-yi) 64 30. 513[ 31. �e U7 Ods __/&`L7 6-�cs. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone 1. 05.31.01 ESM64.o wa. X11l- 0I&T 2. SA) 1/0� CLINr 1P te4 two Sowri4uodv C cc-,I 4. 5131 )o-7 hmic Kef�hmah j�o� rc - �x1In Q PoLso V-01g-s ?4-1 -14-)]C> 5. S�31/ten Ga-�-4 'g�st � �►Z 1��no Soy-z��K 6. 1!;25 DereAffyILO r43—r(—'AS 7. —13119 r1 1'5 k S i es LA^s o t r s Lo 54 3-S 1 . s. J71i iol 4.�NIE*7rx- 1Lksm A-su -Jiva s. S 01Ramcul5(2 (amu- iv 310 -g8G-So 11. y/3 /B 50 h D7. Y ;59 - /§Y sJ31/07 k4. 4 P61f<f1r&74-41?o( A �- PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsidar.the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would unable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in tho height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone ,. S--3t- o-7 '7 7 20 1LCZ-r6 -A`AF,- rAS-(A/e'?v 2. S -31 - ,3-7 J A?cm4W*41�- 361 14AM n vi rc w ,a.&, PIS-a, 3. 3r/o7 G' ucuc�, �rem / S� g2�99 a. 5At le-7- 5. ei5. S/'i I s. �` 31>'a� M►ke. c l�f`�,3 wow �Lo 7. 5.31 1 !'ly�``ee SLa r3 YO 8. S-13,16 7 9. 4�133'101 v�s;c• Ei S1 d�L� Qac. Ara ,L,v fS ,o. A.. 1 o�- Date Name Address Phone 12. tt� Vt & 13. erzl rc r r _ C rr 14. P 15. 16. 17. !` I� t1CYro A S'�G1bie tlA �� S ,.� � G''°'^� � 'i�� 971100)18. W yt C-Vr ,,- .cam 19. ��<\ �f • �� ax. 12�3�. SL � g3`i6S COs 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 2 \I PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider.the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the,City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone 1 5/z3Dtv�a bale v 392 ;;OA7/ klvdiZ 2. T9,3 3. 2 r - 7 4. 5. 3 �'J.LCl�pro"y '1 � 4 40 6. d u Dr Sw 7. a. 7 3 �e.N e e It z- it wir i s 5�c� y -315 9. 3 if Soo 10. Date Address x Phone. Name . S a, 43. 7 "LO Z9 7q OF 44. 45. Sgt z 46. 47. 48.,E �J 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. AS 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 3 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: .1 he City of San Luis Obispo, petition the We, the undersigned residents ofSan Luis Obispo, to reconsiddr.the dates Mayor and City Council of the City of hei ht currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City 9 ordinance. members of.the public are out June, July and August are months when many change Of town. They would therefore be unable to"react to the regulations that may the very nature of the City. this very Postponing discussioimportant issue n of the City Council regarding City of San Luis until Sepbe tember or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the sent anhave a Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveabho e buildings in the Downtown voice in this proposed major change in the height of Area. Phone Date Address , 9 Name S ( , S Lo 7 0 13✓cti6r� 1. Sg r S SLu 2. tg ° 5y3-7�g 3. o C16 4 � � o� �. y�nc.la l'�l a✓cl�titi - Z3 5. 7. Z�7 G'f2oY� S� S� 8. s o Coca +- Zg SLD =S7A-S 9 S i Z �LO - Z 10. S 3- sa 11. 1 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned resident the ty of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height . ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone o - 2. 3. t�- :tavaa y S c� 5id -060 4. a 67ol 1-000, a 5 sa g-z`J 5. 5` 7. �q' 2 r 11 i 9. y za o (3 / a,.w� "7 ze S 3 r 73 1 PETITIUN TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL / OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP s o petition the We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obi p , P of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the.dates Mayor and City Council of the City height currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City ordinance. members of.the public are out June, July and August are months when many change The would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may of town Y the very nature of the City. arding this very important issue discussion of-the City Council reg of San Luis Postponing t until Septeto be mber or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the present and have a Obispo who are concerned for its condition and live fbhebuildings in the Downtown voice in this proposed major change in the height o Area. Phone Address Sic Date Name 2 7 `.ccwv" P 627 17x2 1. _67 2. 771 3. 4. d 7 7. 9. 1 o. Yc✓I' OC 1 � Address �. Phone- ate oneate Name la �I s , IIII, v 12. r v I 6411 wacf ff lw c* 93yo�' 13.5' 19.D r,'S�ir.--ayi �fD C'1 D c/ fr cIS� 14. 15. 23 17. " off �nro _ ae •SA read 18. 23 19. S2 2 �• 20. 3 0 1C�►, c✓i,a,�, . X56M �ku �3 S� 21. 23. CA-DAAO 24. 61vdI r �1 G4 Z4G� Z 25. -3n — y3 r � '�(�i �-�U1GL- 5� DI 26. 27. ci3�l©� 28. r e v ` `ILLS l n� i �ti ►�.> S( � �.3 29. 30. — firls 6A 11) 31. n,{SS« s� � g3�°S �� 0'1 too ► J 5�a Cfi 32. 4;q >- g j i,g-COA S Ah b D 12'W 33. ��" � 57 Cf' �3�5 7 34. 24, 6-4 !2 C'q j SLJ C�q �3y Cl 35. �'-•I -Irl ,z�+ ` �v ;r-0YL-S ' A 36. i- - ' 37. 5 l a 3c 7 S. 38. Su�i� ,rva 7 �h y 3jt`► l t ' 3 c 1 3 c.� .f: Gf i 39. S' 1 ZLZO 41. 42. 147' 67 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: 14 We, the undersigned resident the ity of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the'proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name . Address s.�Phone 1. 1/07 - I - 3. Of 14-71 S - 4. 5. SO 50-SOv ' 7. , z.1 8. Z1 D? n 1 NOS - Ave (v62- 9. 5 2l L'Z U'� -f- e."J e'f _ 11..-j 1' ,l_ Date Name Address Phone 4 3. r� 7 44. 45. 46. 48. C `f .19-1 49. 6 L 50. 7Z a Al2, 51. J/ ��fL L f�1 NA2/� f/L /� O !o L'y/�%�/i o ft_U 60T-302g' 52. - C c. —gam 0 Z 8't 53. . r v y r 252 54. Sfi 55. 56. 57. i 3 �s. 58. - �d� v O Z3 127660 59. ✓� Ui.� l %7A&eG&4C&,,4 60.�i� � � tot, s�U y �y 61. 0 o a44,o 3 iP sc Lo sag-3302 62.': ,D -ogle 77 6 64 b �a 7 2 057 65�y9 7 r - ll(C( ✓� ZZ 66 67 68., 3fi� i3ro.,,v� S S. � SG -27�Y 69. /i 7 a. c. G� y G' c /�� SLUE{ f 70. 01 0 6-s o- -41 72. 73. 3 :n 4 Dafte Name Address Phone 13. �2< d /v0 S ortb 35- J 14. i' !'ati �� gflIeryte j �73a prT► d c i� rv� Sic 5� � 3v 15. 20 C"7 t,-IlIt-lit ?Aeiy24, br , Slti S� (�(�OySZ. 18. $ t l �� ��Kc S LO 2's I-i a b 19. / �/ ��?� 20. -t24/0 Qdj� FtoUrnc D75 4 1. g S tet 2 05 -S3 S-216CS 21. e kW[4 L025 Lei SlyeeF, SLA 22. 5/2 /07 Elltbzt 23. 24. `S/i� 1�a7 5� -ci4g7 25. 4F/;21.67 ' 26. 5/2-2.1- J?3 ( SaM�, o �. 540 27. i ll>D 28. 5-2,3- 07 A nP3� NY6.K 1-75 Pay+t;ok SLb CA ITLR 766 �i 29. 5 - Z3 -o 30. 3 -Z3 -07a�a,_ d rill," 56/Law c�D✓ SLo cA 31. 4 14 g 32. - -O 3 z 3�fcf G 3� 33. 34. D7 - 35. -7, 0 lR F w Kul=7l/ 36. 37. r-1,9 3 6-1 v� -8 S 38. S a 16 I Sl fi� 39. 6 t-I � r o . z 40. �/Z�{/f)7 P�\fir�F� N � �2� 1-1��� Sty �-- - 77 41. S-Z�_�� c )�2��`c /��l�c r�r !gM-5 Qua�z D �9 � 32v-�ial9� 42. DcLr, ��`� K-f Afta Moira �- GQ SL() 0 �SS9)9�s 2 PETITION TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIN OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider.the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. when many members of the public are out June, July and August are months of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 20079 would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in the height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Address (� ) Phone Date GVI/Yj cel' �/b s&'-k� 1. 6 / q M SLA 93 !�; 2. 3. / O• 4. S �� `f 3�lOr" 5. ri�3m/�� �oh1n � x C � 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. i PETITION I. TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsiddr.the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react-to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Council regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would enable the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in ti height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Da a Name Address Phone 1. z M T �lS s z� t7 c v-s r3 t 2. 2 3 LOS G F*1D.0 s S d 3. �r2 5. L 6. Sal s. \�A HGc�in► 4Z o erP Sz1 ( 9. �. SLC: 11. SZ_ oeIZ1 C bf- SCP- cyo _._ _55 &1 INAV NV 5AN MA9tai 7' qto b1 I PETITION �. TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, petition the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, to reconsider the dates currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision of the current City height ordinance. June, July and August are months when many members of the public are out of town. They would therefore be unable to react to the regulations that may change the very nature of the City. Postponing discussion of the City Clcuncil regarding this very important issue until September or October, 2007, would (r.able the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, to be present and have a voice in this proposed major change in t height of the buildings in the Downtown Area. Date Name Address Phone 'qm/0 2 6�X'4L�t - 4�"�L�.Oqf 2. Way GRA I `i8 8A S L.4 0fef C1 93107- 59-" J 3. -,r) 10-1 -si3s v 4. 5 _ I Z 5. �� � �o� 6Yzc -�411 6. Z 1 ba 23 7. 67 8. 9. Ti d /�4�5 tae Sib �73Y05 10. 2 CN 3 d 11. 5 rMamai " Rhone Address ,f PETITION _ R AND CITY COUNCIL OF SAN LUIS OBISPO: We, the undersigned residents of the Ci � Mayor and City Council of the City of � of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, p Petition the currently set for discussion regarding the proposed revision to reconsider the dates ordinance. n of the current Ci . ty height ; June, July and Au � gust are months when man of town. They would therefore be unable to rea Y members of.the public are out the very ct to the regulations that may change ry ' nature of the City. Postponing discussion 'of the Ci ty until September or October, 2007 C°uncil regarding this very important Issue would enable the citizens of the Ci Obispo who are concerned for its condition and liveability, City of San Luis voice in this proposed major change in the height to be present and have a } Area. 9 t of the buildings in the Downtown Date Name �• a7 3 ® Address — 2. S O ® Phone 3. 3 C O - 4. �,Z,S�b7 cc = 5. S /b7 e111111:olijjjj�: !!'11111115 7. Q �J10 s'ya s.9. 7LR S o7 •S <2 — 1-u�� l�alll� r�uurC�� rnone aD3 �lwu�r CfU�. SFS 93�1y1I - �5 17 3. 5"z5-o 7 JA" �b5 i+ it 1-2r GOMINCTD INOtPsN i� SAr/`�l�lb6C7 $Sg 571-i"3 4. 5-Zln-O7 ( 1r[P Smeg IZCwZ Ail e Rv(5. /tbr ,Ql< C1a 9rP `iln2 711 �44�1 .�,�.✓ CL I'ht�2E /��OD/I1 t�v,e y L a� �.oyo�2R.vyE, C�,a 4 3�/z p 6. oZG 7 A)Ai)c p A(LiO 1 E glclaVII'l � Of,8. Coc�cn•��Y, Qc D7 (WgAiLlA i k4' 9. 10. ® 11 . iD ilil o 14SD V. 3 Z Lo 34ol 12. Sla��o --) S Lo 13. 14. S 15. 16. S- e 7 _70.40X ��S'.1id�ltd;t G�r 'O l�9yD I 17. D 18. 19. V 20. 5`3UZo7 Com. y 9� Z-c 3 s iGN� S i. 3 G y 167 22. ORE �aaR�sf NAS 23. (a-1.o 7 '•o �. �o-i`l �l5-alLe � 24. 25. 7 ~ 1 n"1 t=N c_ S fti o GCk3- t 12 0 26. 27.. ol �}t, _�$AaT� SIO- are-( ZZo 28. o v'/Iawr ry/-y o i a 29.. i -10. 2 0 5i40 - 9/9 31. 5- 0 Soy -?Jq- 0?r 32. r� 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41 . 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. Date N Address Phone y 2. sly%;`c � ��_� ... ��=-�._ ��..� �l�n w� 70Y!-0qs' 4• S3o 0? 14erNz rrrld Igf9a 6MI711 S7 .51-0 543 362 5. IS(& MP 5 79& - 218- 6. 07 korrn '?7 -pip / 7. AnA&JA LI C-F, MULVO-1 k&15'`/ ✓5� 9. 10. J a.v Lc a- 61 L d Q-Y, 14 -1-7 vel v '" bat ' e q 3 +01 12. % a ISI 13. rbs e-5 1� T a. ►� -03(' 14. - - � 15. 16. 17. a Zz 18. /_ - D d X33 7553 20. 01 aGo 21 . 22. -3(-g YAN\4�Ak a s S std Q- si5`jS DateName Address ^Phone 23. 5 o �?�w �oz8-�, P Lo 24. 6 2400o >\kgubfmr Lk,c. z4C9�cS� 25. r"l P X016- Q LD Ck, Ct6 26. �*, tt4, 44-t Nc kc-t- Std 01% 9� I 27.. 28 29.. 3t o M OL.7.a j,,�cT 2j !F �J� S CA 31. M;;E�t (u4 C u q u 'j�> cAL l N�-1 -bsO Vcut�, cru r C-1�`f vS 32. ' ► I a-1 �j� mq c6y-al Sfi_� C A f1-3q0533. 531 t �� MGtAL4' A�acLG� k� tic2�+ D«o �a.:i a�,k C� �4ti 34. d S ?/ o 916.r y /fq 7U ?I LOS 9G.AN�S GT SC,0,6 5 t Z+�gz-- 35• 0 �JL -�G✓ �4 Ifo -a!'�s"C � a� �l M DNrI� tit tl,�i�►_ Srt Sty 31ySA.21 37. J631' bbgiEnt 1604 IfIu,CREii9f pt. 5L�043401 sos-Y45-- 38. o STS2`Z a.!l)LLSfs-92 39.4!f/s i 35F (S 40. foD�� E—w 41 . RkTlU A �L 42. 43. 5I3ti0-1 _ tss-A ut 1-2ZaC'=4Lc: nWzkj -*,-C ,c.�l-O 2IS-1452Y 44. ►1 a7 �a +.4�► S Pa g a�_c S L-o CA Ct 3`{a `dka6ex . 45. L 46. 47 48. I'lel La io fn j0. 5 Svc r_11-� g� t . ne. su> 83401 52� 513 .� s��>n�;lv�Sfia.da� P•0� Box 1313 µurn &w1����,�Ds��I�-�SZ$