Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/01/2009, B2 - REPORT ON STAFF DECISION TO CONVERT ON-STREET PARKING SPACES ON HIGUERA STREET IN CONNECTION WITH T council Wne DwSeptember1,2009 j AQcnba REpoRt a CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Jay D. Walter, Public Works Director Prepared By Robert Horch, Parking Services Manager SUBJECT: REPORT ON STAFF DECISION TO CONVERT ON-STREET PARKING SPACES ON HIGUERA STREET IN CONNECTION WITH THE WINEMAN HOTEL RENOVATION, INCLUDING OUTDOOR DINING AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Confirm the staff decision to approve sidewalk widening on Higuera Street, resulting in conversion of five parking spaces to pedestrian sidewalk use, in order to promote several City goals for the Downtown including wider pathways, , historic street lamp installations and tree enhancements along Higuera and Chorro Streets, as part of the Wineman Hotel restoration project at the expense of the project developer; and 2. Direct staff to develop a recommended threshold and process for parking space conversion as a part of an upcoming revision to the City's Sidewalk Dining Ordinance. DISCUSSION Issue Overview The Wineman Hotel is located in the heart of the Downtown, at the corner of Higuera and Chorro Streets. The restoration of this building has been long hoped for — for at least the last 25 years. A project is now underway that will accomplish the following goals for the City and the Downtown in particular: 1. Historic preservation 2. Seismic strengthening 3. Downtown housing 4. Affordable housing 5. Downtown destination enhancement In July, the project developer approached staff and proposed vol un improvements that would significantly redevelop the public sidewalk and curb areas in front of the project along Higuera Street and Chorro Street. These improvements included: 1. Sidewalk, pedestrian light and tree enhancement (consistent with Council's major City goal) 2. Potential Outdoor dining expansion (also consistent with Council goals) The proposed improvements along Higuera Street were significant in both cost and scope in bringing this street up to current standards and performing significant infrastructure reinvestment Dol- Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 2 when it was not required of the project itself. The trade-off for these added improvements is the conversion of five street parking spaces to a widened sidewalk area. Given the City's desire to see active use at this highly visible location— and given the likely attainment of other City goals as part of the offer to also redevelop the sidewalks at this corner—City staff viewed the proposal favorably. Under the City's current policies and procedures, Council approval is not required for such an action: City staff has the authority to negotiate the best use of limited public space within the right of way and removal of parking spaces has been allowed when there is significant benefit to the public, health and safety issues are at stake, or it achieves significant investment in the public infrastructure without substantial financial assistance by the City. Under normal circumstances, given the high visibility of this location, staff would have brought the issue of converting these five parking spaces to higher pedestrian use to the Council for a final determination if time permitted, or if the trade in public investment was not considered substantial. However, time was of the essence and lacking a second Council meeting in August, staff agreed to the proposal in light of its consistency with several key City goals. As discussed below, while this decision was within the staff s authority to make, it has caused controversy and concern and a request to Council to place the matter on a future agenda. Because work was already underway on the site, the City Manager has exercised his authority to bring the matter to Council, rather than to wait for the usual process of Council referral to unfold (a likely scenario). In terms of the future, staff believes that it is appropriate to establish clearer parameters for when Council approval should be required in similar situations. It is recommended that we develop these clearer guidelines in conjunction with an upcoming update to the City's Sidewalk Dining ordinance, when we return to the Council with the ordinance in the next few weeks. The Evolution of the Current Sidewalk Improvement Plan The Wineman Hotel Restoration project involves converting a long unused hotel property on Higuera Street to affordable housing units with restaurant and retail tenants on the ground floor. It is a substantial reinvestment in the heart of our Downtown and an excellent example of private redevelopment, with some public support to facilitate affordable housing. However, due to the scope of the project, conditions of project approval contained no requirement for replacement of the sidewalk (except where a portion of the sidewalk would otherwise be removed for utility installations). This is typical where only tenant improvements are being made, particularly in cases of seismic retrofit. Because of the owner's intent to lease-out much of the lower floorspace for potential restaurant tenants, the applicant met on May 14`h with Public Works Development Review and Engineering Inspection staff for a site inspection to review the existing public improvements along the Higuera and Chon o Street frontages. The purpose of the inspection was to determine the scope of sidewalk replacement required for areas of proposed alterations. Downtown beautification and investment has been a Council goal for many years, with even greater emphasis in the Council's objectives for 2009-11, and staff works with projects to implement improvements when possible. Due to the number of utility cuts in the sidewalk staff suggested that the developer contemplate a complete upgrade to the existing sidewalk so as to minimize the patchwork of old curb, gutter, and sidewalk "intermingled" with some new and existing "Mission Style" improvements. Because of the floor level differences between the existing sidewalk and proposed building entries, the developer was.also faced with difficult 8a -a I Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 3 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access issues that might be resolved if the design could be partially accommodated in the public sidewalk area. The project architect provided a preliminary proposal in late May to City staff with sidewalk widening options to evaluate whether such a proposal could be endorsed. The proposal detailed two options: 1. Partial Improvements. This option included a widening/bulb-out along only a portion of the Higuera frontage that could also accommodate a potential sidewalk cafd permit for the lease spaces at 853 Higuera. The partial option included the conversion of four metered parking spaces. The partial option had several downsides: it did not solve the ADA access issues at all entrances; did not provide a larger pedestrian queuing area at the corner; left little option for lighting upgrades; and would leave plain concrete adjacent to sidewalk areas with the new Mission Style upgrades. 2. Widening Entire Frontage. The second option included widening along the entire frontage, which included the conversion of five metered spaces. Both options included the upgrades to the sidewalk along the Chorro Street frontage. However, in light of the advantages offered by the conversion of five spaces, which provided for proper ADA access to all the Higuera Street entrances of the project and allowing for sidewalk dining for two potential restaurant tenants, staff preferred the option to provide widening across the entire Higuera Street frontage. Discussion continued between City staff and the project architect, culminating with the submittal of a plan and a letter on June 17th which described the benefits of the proposed widening stating the developer's offer to pay for the improvements. Following staff's conceptual support for the five space conversion option, the architect was given additional direction to provide a more detailed plan to clarify what the sidewalk improvements, curb heights, drainage improvements, and resultant street grades would look like. The second submittal of the architectural plan was reviewed and quickly circulated to several City departments. The plan and process for approval (via encroachment permit) was endorsed and the architect was given the direction to have complete public improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer. The public improvement plans were subsequently submitted for review and approval. Review of the public improvement plans was coordinated by the Public Works Development Review Division and included review by and/or input from the Building Division, Planning Division, Fire Department, City Engineer, City Arborist, Traffic/Transportation, and the Parking Division. The negotiations during the more detailed review included the applicant's agreement to provide additional sidewalk improvements beyond the minimum requirements, replacing nearly 300 feet (Higuera. and Chorro Frontages) of old sidewalk and street furniture. These improvements include the infrastructure and foundations for the installation of four pedestrian level street lights per City Engineering Standards, with the City providing the light fixtures. The applicant would provide an additional street tree along the Chorro Street frontage where a gap occurs in the existing tree spacing. The applicant further proposed the installation of new frames and tree grates for the existing street trees that could accommodate these improvements. The public improvement plans were submitted and a plan review completed. The concept plan was B� ,3 I , Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 4 discussed with the City Manager on July 14`h, and then introduced to Council members and other stakeholders over the next couple of weeks. As noted earlier, although it is not required under the City's current policies and procedures, under ideal circumstances staff would have brought this matter formally to Council because of the visible and highly trafficked location, and given the number of parking spaces involved. However, in this case, because of timing in relationship to actual field work, staff was only able to inform the Council of the planned decision to issue an encroachment permit for said work. This was because final review and concurrence for the proposed improvements was achieved too late to get it on the Council agenda for August 4th, and with the cancellation of the August 18`h meeting, too much time would have passed before the Council met on September I", as the developer had an aggressive schedule to meet for completing tenant improvements. Because of its location at the heart of Downtown any decision for change at this location would likely cause some controversy. Unfortunately, there is very limited physical space to try and accomplish all the major goals and objectives of the Council and community. As such, the issue involved a classic weighing of the options to judge which best promoted the "greater good" for the community as a whole. Guided by existing City policy/goals, staff felt the substantial benefits to the public as well as the solutions for the private building issues was a good compromise that produced the most benefits for the larger public and met more City objectives than preserving the parking spaces. Public Outreach Efforts: Not Ideal; but Good a Faith Effort was Made The manner in which this proposal and negotiation proceeded was not ideal in terms of our usual deliberate and inclusive decision-making process that San Luis Obispo is known for. This situation, due to its complexity, timing and location was not typical even though staff attempted to resolve decisions using typical permitting processes. We were presented with an opportunity that could advance many City goals — but only if we could act in a rapid, entrepreneurial and somewhat "risk-taking" fashion (at least from the standpoint of controversy) to determine a highest and best use of the public right of way, in light of all of the competing interests. The Downtown Association (DA) was notified about the project construction for purposes of coordinating any requirements for Farmers Market. A copy of the plan was picked-up.by the DA for its review and input in late July. City staff planned to bring the issue up at the July 2009 DA Parking & Access meeting, but it was canceled for lack of a quorum. At the August 2009 meeting, Ken Porche, owner of Charles Shoes, attended to register his concerns about the loss of parking spaces and the lack of communication about the proposed action. Committee members were upset that they did not have any notice in advance, and that the Parking Fund would be "harmed" by the loss of revenue. After discussing the rationale for staff s support (e.g. how the planned improvements tie to City and Downtown goals), some Committee members came to understand the reasoning for a proposal involving a loss of parking. They then expressed their feeling that a wider sidewalk with dining will bring more pedestrian access to surrounding businesses as well. However, some remained concerned about process, as outlined in an attached letter (more on how to follow-up on this concern later). Regarding Charles Shoes, Public Works staff spoke to Cindi Ashley (store �a _y Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 5 manager) about the Wineman project during a visit to the site on Tuesday, August 4, 2009. She seemed favorable to the idea, with concerns about maintaining the existing spaces in front of the business for parking, and not converting the remaining space to a loading zone. Staff did not talk to Mr. Porche directly prior to his objections to the proposal since we had contacted the manager of the store. In hindsight, we should have done this or asked Ms. Ashley to relay the concept to Mr. Porche for consideration since one of his concerns is how notification to adjacent businesses was undertaken by staff. Litigation Exposure The City Attorney advises that there is a potential for litigation brought by the developer against the City in the event the City changes its position regarding the Higuera Street sidewalk improvements under the argument that there has been detrimental reliance on the City's initial position, and the developer is harmed by such change in the City's position. There is also a possibility of litigation brought by neighboring businesses that do not want a reduction of parking spaces along Higuera. The likelihood of success of the latter action is remote, as a court is unlikely to substitute its judgment for that of the Council in such a matter of local municipal affairs. However, there is a real possibility of liability in the event the City's actions can be directly linked to economic harm to the developer under these circumstances, notwithstanding the various immunities that the City would raise. Future Improvements in the Process Space in the Downtown area is very limited and competition for its use on both private property as well as the public right of way is intensive with a variety of competing priorities that can be used to determine the highest and "best" use for space. It is difficult to determine a"one size fits all" for each issue since locations vary in complexity and interpretation of the best use of public space is subjective whether you are a business owner, developer, walker, tourist or any of the other users or stakeholders of Downtown. Staff has always tried to determine the best use of the limited public right of way that meets Council objectives and goals while meeting as many expectations of the stakeholders as we can. Unfortunately, as space continues to get more limited these competing interests will more often clash and the Council may not want to have staff solely responsible for determining when improvements should be exchanged for parking spaces. City staff is in the process of updating the City's Sidewalk Cafo Ordinance and a separate resolution that establishes policies for sidewalk widening. The updates to the Ordinance were reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 13, 2009 and will likely proceed to City Council on October 20, 2009. While it is unlikely that such circumstances will "coalesce" in the future exactly like the Wineman Hotel project, staff suggests that we should better define our process for parking space removal when it is voluntary in nature and not a requirement of development. While it would be cumbersome to require extensive approvals for the removal of individual parking spaces in the Downtown, we should consider a threshold that would trigger more formal and elevated review, especially when removal is connected with sidewalk widening and dining (as opposed to being health or safety related). In conjunction with the updates to the Sidewalk Dining Ordinance, staff will outline procedural options to sidewalk widening when this item is brought to the Council in October 2009. �oZ S Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 6 CONCURRENCES This report has already described the rationale for staffs' support of the proposal and the efforts made - albeit imperfectly-to communicate the plan under the pressure of time (and staff has also recommended a process for improving the process in the future). In terms of the matter now before Council, the DA's Parking and Access Committee s submitted a letter to the Community Development Director expressing concern about the process, including notice and timely communication of this issue (Attachment 1). The letter also included a request for the Parking Fund to be compensated for the loss of parking revenue in some manner, the reason being that the money realized by the General Fund (through the permit process) is not used for parking. This is discussed below under Fiscal Impact. Staff met with representatives of the DA on Tuesday, August 25 to further discuss the proposal and the process. The DA Board has not taken a formal position due to meeting timing. They may be able to provide some formal input to Council prior to the September 1 meeting, but that is uncertain at this time. City staff was invited to meet with the Chamber of Commerce Executive Board on August 20 to inform them of the project, and met a very favorable response. The Chamber Board voted to send the City Council a letter in support of the project on the basis of its overall positive impact to the Downtown (Attachment 2—to be Red-filed upon receipt). Staff also believes that the proposal is consistent with several City policy documents, all of which were approved only after extensive public input. These include: 1. The General Plan (e.g. downtown housing, affordable housing, downtown role as a social gathering place) 2. Land Use Element Policy 4.1: Downtown's Role: "...The commercial core is a preferred location for retail uses that are suitable for pedestrian access, off-site parking, and compact building spaces. " 3. Land Use Element Policy 4.5: Walking Environment.: "Downtown should provide safe, exciting places for walking and pleasant places for sitting. To invite exploration, mid-block walkways, courtyards, and interior malls should be integrated with new and remodeled buildings, while preserving continuous building faces on most blocks. " 4. Land Use Element Policy 4.10. Parking: "There should be a diversity of parking opportunities. Any major increments in parking supply should take the form of structures, located at the edge of the commercial core, so people will walk rather than drive between points within the core. Retail uses outside the core, and professional office developments, may have on-site parking for customers and clients. " 5. The Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center ("Downtown Concept Plan," which promotes parking on the perimeter of downtown, not in the core). 6. The Downtown Strategic Plan (which emphasizes how important it is for the Downtown to stay"fresh"and creative and offer unique experiences that cannot be found elsewhere). T. The Council's 2009-11 objective for Downtown Maintenance and Beautification . OC2_� Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 7 FISCAL IMPACT While there may be a reduction in revenue by the loss of five (5) parking meters at this location, it will have a minimal financial impact on the City's Parking Fund from the loss of meter revenue and fines. The parking will be absorbed into other parking meters and in structures (Marsh Structure is one block away) because parking demand does not go away: it simply adjusts to other locations. In short, people do not come downtown to park: they come for the shopping, entertainment, dining, cultural activities, commercial services and unique experience the Downtown offers. The Wineman project and the improvements to public sidewalks will hopefully create more of a draw to the Downtown and specifically in this location where a higher pedestrian element will encourage more foot traffic passing adjacent businesses. The Parking Fund may actually be better off with the loss of parking in this area in the long term if access to the businesses is improved and Marsh Street Structure is the parking location of choice. In 2008-09 the average income for a metered parking space was approximately $1,500 a year, including revenue and parking fines. Multiplying $1,500 by the five (5) parking spaces eliminated for the Wineman project, it may appear that the Parking Fund will lose $7,500 per year. However, since the parking demand lost from these five on-street spaces will be captured in another location, the revenues will be somewhat offset in our current parking supply. It will not be a total loss in revenue or parking supply. The "best case" scenario would be that the parking demand can be accommodated at other on- street parking spaces or parking lot. If that happens, the loss of parking will be revenue neutral although competition for spaces may increase a very small amount. Looking at a "worse-case" scenario, demand will move into a structure (a goal of our parking principles) that does not generate as much revenues as on-street metered parking. The average annual revenue for a structure parking space in 2008-09 was $800 therefore the annual loss could be $3,500 a year if this occurs. This is a small amount when compared to the substantial improvement cost (estimated to be $60,000) associated with the proposed improvements being undertaken by the developer. 2008-09 Average Potential Type of Parking Annual Revenue Loss Parking meter spaces $1,500 x 5 spaces $7,500 Structure spaces $800 x5 spaces $4,000 $700 $3,500 If the Wineman project is successful through the redevelopment of the building and its downtown residential and commercial uses, sidewalk dining will increase parking demand and this loss will be recovered by the added numbers of shoppers and diners coming downtown. Setting aside the minimal fiscal impact, reimbursement by the General Fund for any amount of on-street parking revenue losses would be inappropriate, since the right-of-way used for metered parking is not owned or leased by the Parking Fund. If there was a market-based charge to the ( I Wineman Hotel Sidewalk Improvements Page 8 Parking Fund for the use or acquisition of this valuable land, then some form of market-based reimbursement by the General Fund might be appropriate when spaces are removed. However, until such time as the General Fund charges the Parking Fund for the use or acquisition of this right-of-way, no reimbursement for its loss is appropriate. Lastly, it should be noted that the City's General Fund supports Downtown activities, including many events and promotions (e.g. Farmer's Market) at a far higher level than any other shopping district in the City. More routine service levels are also much higher in the Downtown than elsewhere in the community (e.g. street sweeping). Therefore, in any weighing of"quid pro quo", the Downtown enjoys great General Fund commitment and investment, even during very difficult financial times, and staff recommends against a more proprietary view of the funding relationship. ALTERNATIVES Council could require the developer to restore the on street parking spaces. This alternative is not recommended because the City is gaining a significantly improved public infrastructure at this location, with costs almost entirely borne by private development, consistent with Council direction and policy goals. The loss of parking revenue on an annual basis is far outweighed by the private investment. Additionally, as noted above, the City would be exposing itself to potential litigation by the developer. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from the DA Parking and Access Committee 2. Letter from the Chamber of Commerce Executive Board (to be Red-filed upon receipt) TAParkinglCAR Wineman Hotel.doc ATTACHMENT I 18 August 2009 To: John Mandeville, Community Development Director From: Tom Swem, SLO Downtown Association Parking and Access Committee Chair Prepared by: Deborah Cash,Executive Director Re: Wineman Sidewalk Widening Project The Downtown Association Parking and Access Committee recently reviewed the proposed expansion of the sidewalk adjacent to the Wineman Hotel and would like to provide feedback on the project. Reviewing the proposed changes to the existing sidewalk,we note that the sidewalk will be bulbed out approximately six feet,possibly to accommodate sidewalk dining,and as a result, displaces five parking places. The Downtown Association understands the need to maintain an atmosphere where pedestrian friendly,experiential activities invite visitors to enjoy themselves and `set a spell.' As we can see from the few outdoor venues people currently patronize—and from noting the success of outdoor cafes in other communities—the idea of sidewalk seating is attractive and desirable. While the Downtown.Association has participated in previous discussions about sidewalk cafc policies, we are also committed to supporting the needs of businesses and communicating information to them about developments that may affect them. In this particular instance,the Downtown Association office(TNP Event Coordinator Diana Cotta)was first apprised of the sidewalk issue about a month ago regarding the need to alert Farmers Market vendors of the construction and to make any changes necessary. Deborah Cash later spoke with Hal Hannula about how to work out what needed to be done to accommodate the participants and the vendors and learned that the construction included a bulbout displacing five parking spaces permanently. Shortly thereafter, at its August meeting,the Board deferred the item to the next Parking and Access committee meeting(two days later). At that meeting, Mr.Ken Porche,owner of Charles Shoes, shared his frustration about not having a voice in the process and learning that the bulbout,and hence possible loss of parking and sidewalk dining,was a`done deal.' Robert Horch, Downtown champion,discussed that the item had indeed moved quickly through the process but that it did in fact meet all the City's criteria for expanding the opportunities for outdoor seating,though he also was not happy about the loss of parking. � -9 ATTACHMENT f The points the committee would like to pass along are: (a)with the size of the impact the businesses near the bulbout will face,it is frustrating that those persons were not included in the early decision making/discussions—including the Downtown Association and, (b)that the income lost from those spaces needs to be addressed as to how to replenish the lost income to the parking fund. Losing parking is a bitter pill; it is offset by the fact that we are educating the public about using parking structures and their availability. However,the structures depend on the income from the meters to be solvent; any lost revenue from the displaced parking should be ultimately made up to the fund. We understand it is tough to accomplish conflicting objectives; in this case,however,the outcome might have been more palatable had the nearby property owners and the Downtown Association been apprised early on of the intent of the Wineman property owners and allowed to weigh in. We understand there is a City Council meeting on September 1 where opinions may be offered;we feel the property owners may think this is `too little,too late,' and understand their concern. While we don't want to impede the general improvement of Downtown, the process in this case seems to have overlooked a few key players. The issue of replenishment of lost parking revenue is also something we'd like to discuss. Please let me know if there is any way to bring forward discussion on this item prior to September I"meeting.The Downtown Association is happy to attempt to facilitate a meeting of the minds on this issue if possible. Cc: San Luis Obispo Downtown Association Board of Directors Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer Robert Horch, Parking Services Director Downtown Association Parking and Access Committee Ken Porche, Charles Shoes Cyndi Ashley,Charles Shoes 501 -/0 REG, L-1VE RED FILE AUG 2 7 1009 MEETING AGENDA SLO CITY CLERK DATE 94 ITEM #_a2i- San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce 1039 Chorro Street- San Luis Obispo, Califomia 93401-3278 (805)781-2777- FAX (805)543-1255 David E. Garth, PresidenVCEO 11-p2 D SPY G�rn/.1-rL R'COUNCIL 2 CDD DICH August 27, 2009 f�AeCmT AUZ O-FIN DI C�A6Fc6ASs7CrrF/1-4 ""IRE C <�TTORNEY p'PW DI Mayor Dave Romero CLERKORIG L�POLICMembers of the City Council ❑ DEPTgEADS ff-REC D City of San Luis Obispo 1f'J UTIL DIR � ®'HR D9990 Palm Street NGcJ nMC5 �DuuCc San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 r CtTa rv162 � CLE 2C Subject: Sept. 1 Council agenda item re Report on staff decision to convert on- street parking spaces on Higuera Street in connection with the Wineman Hotel renovations, including outdoor dining and sidewalk improvements Dear Mayor Romero and Council Members, The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce would like to voice its strong support for the sidewalk improvements that the project developer for the Wineman Hotel has proposed to make in the public right-of-way along Higuera and Chorro Streets. These voluntary enhancements represent a significant investment in the heart of downtown San Luis Obispo that are consistent with the Downtown Concept Plan as well as the Chamber's vision for outdoor dining, improved sidewalks, and downtown beautification. These improvements being made to a long-vacant space in the heart of downtown will enhance the area as a multi-use restaurant, entertainment, shopping, civic and professional center. While the loss of the five parking spaces is certainly something to carefully consider, the removal of these parking spaces helps further many important goals of the Chamber. The fact that these investments in the City's beautification will be paid for voluntarily by the developer, particularly during these challenging economic times, is truly a remarkable opportunity. People do not come to the downtown to park; they come to eat,play, shop and work. Providing a richer destination experience benefits the overall health of the downtown and fuels a healthier economic climate for all businesses. We strongly encourage you to confirm the staff decision to convert the parking spaces into wider sidewalks and streetscape improvements. Thank you for considering our views in this matter. omas Lebens airperson of the Board cc: Ken Hampian, City Manager C Page I of I Settle Allen From: Bob Tedone[btedone@charter.net] Sent: Mon 9/7/2009 5:47 PM To: Marx,Jan;Ashbaugh,John; Settle,Allen; Romero, Dave; Carter,Andrew / Cc: Subject: Wineman Project Attachments: Dear Councilpersons, I read recently in the Tribune that the Council is considering removing five parking spaces in front of the wineman Hotel project. In my opinion, this would be a huge error. As a "grab-and-go" shopper I ` look for a parking space that is close to my store and is quick and RECEIVED convenient. The parking garages are great if I'm planning to spend a lot of time downtown, like when going to a movie. I would spend more SEP 0 9 2009 time(and gas...and pollution) getting into and out of a parking garage than I would actually shopping. OK, five spaces isn't a lot. SLO CITY CLERK But it's five less and we've been having less and less throughout the years. Additionally, the proposed bulb out would be to slow traffic. Have you driven on Higurera Street the recently? How slow can it get? > c Thank you. Sincerely, Fit, Bob Tedone SI D IVD A-02 San Luis Obispo Resident https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/asettle/InboxfWineman%2OProject.EML?Cmd=open 9/9/2009 Page 1 of 1 Council,SloCity From: jeanoreno@juno.com [jeanoreno@juno.com] Sent: Thu 8/27/2009 8:49 AM To: Council,SloCity Cc: Subject: don't remove Higuera parking spaces RECEIVED Attachments: Dear Mayor&Council Members, AUG 2 8 2GG9 I read that you are considering removing 5 parking spaces in the 800 block of Higuera. Please don't do i .. SLO CITY CLERK We need every on-street parking space we can get. So many spaces have been removed in the recent past making it incredibly difficult.for people unable to walk any distance to enjoy downtown businesses. Moving parking spaces further out from the core of downtown is not going to help our city. Parking structures are great but not for those who have difficulty walking. If you want strong tax revenue then you should do everything you can to make it easier to visit downtown for all people so they will continue to eat,shop and spend money downtown. Thank you, Jean Reno NiP^ZD �Ur' .� ive C 1255 OrcuttRd #A14 e;!S COUNCIL ZCDD DIR RED FILE SLO,CA 93401 '�CAO iF FIN DIR $ACAO FIRE CHIEF MEETING AGENDA ATTORNEY PW DIR 9 , ITEM # CLERK/ORIG �POLICE CHF DATE2 ❑ DEPT HEADS 9 REC DIR -�� [W UTIL DIR R HR DIR cldELcJ71�etS 'K 00 iecCJ Q�Tyi2/6iZ Handyman Franchises. Click Here. x eir� C'LE�G https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/don%27t%20remove%20Higuera%... 8/27/2009 Page 1 of 1 Council,SloCity From: Frstcls@aol.com [Frstcls@aol.com] Sent: Wed 8/26/2009 5:39 PM To: Council,SloCity Cc: Subject Loosing parking spaces-Higuera Attachments: Hi -just received a post card from Ken Porche,the owner of Charles Shoes stating that Higuera St. stands a chance of losing 5 parking spaces. As far as I'm concerned that can't happen. We business owners need all the parking available to us. PIs do all that u can to stop this from happening. Parking is a premium in San Luis and it's getting worse. The parking prices have gone up the tickets have almost doubled. It's crazy. PIs help! Tks. Rene Scamegi RED FILE RECEIVED West End Espresso &Tea 805-543-4902 MEETING AGENDA AUG 2 8 2009 DATE q11 ITEM # a2 SLO CITY CLERK ,4/94o (0?V Fir.s. C COUNCIL 'f`CDD DIR 7p CAO L71 FIN DIR ACAO FIRE CHIEF ATTORNEY POLDIR ICE CHF �CLERK/ORIG ❑ DE;�T. H�,EADS �REC DIR t UTIL DIR yo?�irZri E ;F H14 UIR K AlEW7/-"CS Y hoc. vacL e //—,,/ ."6,12- 7-y e7 "6,12- rye7 https:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/Loos ing%20parking%20spaces%20:.. 8/27/2009 J \_J y ��u���utuIIIIIIIIIIIIPp11'�IIIIII� COUNCIL Redfile _City of San Luis Obispo., Administration;Departments _ i DATE: August 27, 2009 TO: Council FROM: Ken Hampian, City Manager Prepared By: Shelly Stanwyck, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Item B2: Report on Staff Decision Regarding On Street Parking Conversion in Front of the Wireman Hotel In preparation for the September 1 n Council Meeting Mayor Romero requested that staff provide to him and all Council members a copy of the City's "Sidewalk Cafe Ordinance." Reference is made to this particular ordinance on page B2-5 of the September 1, 2009 Agenda Packet. Attached is the current ordinance presently in effect. Revisions to the ordinance are tentatively scheduled to be considered by Council at its second meeting in October 2009. COP=e4,,,fW 1 A lcDD DIRRED FILE e G FIN DIRME INGAGENDA Q6e1*IRE CHIEFDA 9 O ITEM #� L��pW DIRPOLICE CHFREC DIF1 �U7IL DIR- PR DIES ri fk&g 60Vj;0-1 ATTACHMENT Sidewalk Cafe Ordinance RECEIVED AUG 2 7 2009 SLO CITY CLER" 1 Chapter 5.50 SIDEWALK CAFES 5.50.010 Intent This chapter is intended to ensure opportunities for properly licensed and permitted restaurants to offer outdoor dining on public sidewalks, in a manner compatible with pedestrian traffic and surrounding uses, in commercial zones where restaurants are allowed. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.015 Permits required A. A sidewalk cafe permit is required to operate an outdoor dining service in the public right-of-way. Applications for a revocable permit shall be made to the community development department. B. An encroachment permit shall be required pursuant to Chapter 12.04 of this code. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.020 Architectural review At the community development director's discretion, architectural review may be required pursuant to Chapter 2.48 of this code. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.025 Application content Applications shall be made jointly by the business operator requesting use of a sidewalk area for outdoor dining and the property owner(s) of the building in which the business is located. Such application shall be accompanied by: A. Signed consent of business owner(s) and property owner(s); B. A copy of a current business tax certificate issued to the business operator; C. Proof of liability insurance, meeting city standards, which names the city as additionally insured for the term of the permit to the approval of the city risk manager, D. A liability release agreement wherein the recipient(s) of the permit agrees to hold the city harmless from liability arising from the operation of such sidewalk cafe; E. A detailed site plan, drawn to scale, noting dimensions of the area proposed for outdoor dining; the proposed number and location of tables, chairs and other furnishings to be included in the dining area; the relationship of the outdoor dining area to the indoor dining area; and all sidewalk obstructions in the vicinity; F. A detailed description of the type, color, and material of all proposed outdoor furniture, such as tables, chairs, barriers, planters, umbrellas, signs, and lighting; G. An explanation of how any required additional parking will be provided; H. A statement of proposed hours of operation; and I. Any other information deemed necessary by the community development or public works directors. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) Page 2 of 3 5.50.030 Fees In addition to application fees, the applicant(s) shall pay an annual sidewalk use fee. Fees shall be as adopted by resolution of the city council. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.035 Review procedures Public noticing and review procedures shall be the same as those required for an administrative use permit as described in Chapter 17.58 of this code. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.040 Eligible sites Outdoor dining must be within the frontage of an existing restaurant with on-premises seating and incidental to the operation of that restaurant. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.045 Required operational standards A. Alcoholic Beverage Restrictions. Establishments that serve alcohol must obtain any additional permits required by the Alcohol Beverage Control Board of the state of California. B. Hours of operation shall not begin prior to eight a.m. nor extend later than ten p. m. C. . Parking shall be provided as required for restaurants in the zoning regulations D. A path of travel for pedestrians with a minimum width of six feet, maintained free and clear of any existing obstacles (street furniture, utilities, etc.) and any items placed on the sidewalk in conjunction with the outdoor dining operation, shall be provided along the contiguous length of the area proposed for outdoor dining to the satisfaction of the public works director. Such clear pathway shall link with pathways on each side of the property. E. Moveable barriers are required to delineate outdoor dining areas except where only one row of tables and chairs immediately abutting the business storefront is proposed. F. Moveable barriers shall be designed and attached to the sidewalk in a manner approved by the public works director. G. Where umbrellas or awnings are used, a vertical clearance of at least seven feet must be maintained.. H. The placement, color, style, and types of outdoor furniture and barriers shall be consistent with and complement the design and appearance of the affected building to the satisfaction of the community development director. I. Items used within the outdoor dining areas may not be left outdoors overnight or when not in use. J. Outdoor dining facilities shall be confined to the area shown on an approved site plan exhibit and shall not interfere with building egress to the satisfaction of the chief building official and the fire marshal. K. Outdoor dining areas shall be used for sit-down food and beverage service only. No stand-up or take-out service is permitted in the outdoor dining area. L. The outdoor dining area must be maintained in a clean and safe condition at all times with appropriate provision for trash disposal and recycling. M. The operation must meet all required county health department standards and obtain any necessary permits. N. The permit issued shall not be transferable in any manner. Page 3 of 3 I O. The outdoor dining operation shall in no way interfere with access to utilities. P. . Smoking shall be prohibited in the outdoor dining area. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.050 Terms and expiration A sidewalk cafe permit will be for an unlimited term, unless a limited term is deemed appropriate by the community development director. The permit shall automatically expire upon expiration of the business tax certificate or upon failure to pay the required annual sidewalk use fee. Operators wishing to renew an expired permit shall submit a new application with appropriate fees. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.055 Grounds for denial of permit The community development director shall deny the sidewalk cafe permit if the operation will not meet provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.060 Revocation or suspension of permit A. The city retains the right to revoke or suspend the permit upon twenty-four hours' written notice to the sidewalk cafe operator for any cause, regardless of conformance with these provisions. Situations that may merit suspension or revocation include, but are not limited to: 1. Emergencies, parades, necessary construction or maintenance, at the discretion of the public works director; 2. Suspension, revocation, or cancellation of any necessary health permit(s); 3. . Incorrect or inadequate insurance coverage; or 4. Failure to comply with conditions of permit approval. B. Within twenty-four hours of receipt of written notice of revocation or suspension, regardless of any appeal of the action, the operation shall cease and the sidewalk cafe operator shall restore the sidewalk to the condition existing prior to the placement of outdoor dining facilities or to some other condition acceptable to the public works director. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) 5.50.065 Appeals Decisions of the community development director to approve, deny, revoke or suspend a sidewalk cafe permit may be appealed to the city council subject to the provisions of Chapter 1.20. (Ord. 1362 § 2 (part), 2000) RECEIVE[ From: Bob Tedone [mailto:bWdone@charter.net] A116 3 ,_ 7009 Sent: Mon 8/31/2009 5:54 AM SLO CITY CLERK To: Council, SloCity Subject: Parking on Higuera Dear Councilpersons, I read yesterday in the Tribune that the Council is considering removing five parking spaces in front of the Wineman Hotel project. In my opinion,this would be a huge error. As a"grab-and-go"shopper I look for a parking space that is close to my store and is quick and convenient to access and leave(as opposed to the parking garages). Additionally,the proposed bulb out would be to slow traffic.Have you driven on Higurera Street the recently?How slow can it get? We have way,way too many on-street parking spaces in the past years. Let's not compound our mistakes on this project. Thank you. Sincerely, Bob Tedone San Luis Obispo Resident RED FILE NA-aD Copy &WAIL- DIR iMEETINGAGENDA 1��"ert@'GrAla-6flL 'CDD IR r1/3tGC3"FIN 2 DIR DATE 1 a ITEM 0ACAG/S!;-4,y/rt-,e2-FIRE CHIEF D ATTORNEY 13-PW DIR E3`C1-ERK(ORIG ['POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS 12�-REC DIR Fel- �Pii1 C'�-UTILDIR t IrHR DIR Al&-d-n nq,� e" ntr-,- e aiiscounc,l mcmomnbum crty of san Luis owspo. aamirnstuation bepautment DATE: August 31,2009 TO: City Council FROM: Ken Hampian, City Manager SUBJECT: Wineman Project and Farmer's Market Attached is a self-explanatory letter from the Downtown Association Executive Director regarding a concern recently expressed concerning the impact of the possible sidewalk widening on Farmer's Market. In addition to what Deb has to say, I also wish to advise the Council that our staff, including the Fire Chief,are well aware of the issue and will work closely with the DA, Deb and the Thursday Night Committee to find a satisfactory solution. RED FILES COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA p- u CDD DIR DA EyLo9 ITEM # B.ZDGAe Q„,,,� FIN DIR ` 'AFIRE CHIEF 9770RNEY L�pyy DIR ❑DEP CLCLERK/EA0 OLICE CHF 7 ,gpg p� REC Diq ff',L71L DIR SHR DIR eery ntce � CGG�Ze RECEIVED AUG 31 2009 SLO CITY CLERK GACoundl Support&Cortese\CAO Memos\Wineman and Farmers Marketdoc 31 August 2009 To: Robert Horch,Downtown Champion From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director Re: Thursday Night Promotions-Parking for Farmers Market vendors A question has been raised regarding the.widening of the Wineman Sidewalk and the potential for Farmers Market Association,Inc (a contractor with SLO Downtown Association Thursday Night Promotions)vendors being assigned on Thursday nights to one side of the street permanently as a result. At this point,there is no basis for this concern. While the Board of Directors will discuss the item at tomorrow morning's meeting, I think I am safe in saying that regardless of what decision is made by the Council on September 1,the Downtown Association will work with the Farmers Market Association, Inc to(a)provide adequate space for their vendors within our market area and(b) continue the monthly rotation of the vendors from one side of the block to the other. It really falls to the Council to make a decision based on the merits of the project as to what our next step will be,which would be to accommodate the project if it is approved—or do nothing,if it is not. Any discussion about permanent placement is rumor at this point; future placement of the Farmers Market Association,Inc.vendors will fall to the Downtown.Association once it has direction. Cc: Downtown Association Board of Directors Diana Cotta,TNP Event Coordinator RED FILE MEETING AGENDA COUNCIL 07-CDD DIR DATE 9 o ITEM #,� ffAe*-� � L-FIN DIR �� �� �'�� /��2L�"FIRE CHIEF PJ-CLERK/aR10 n'-PCLICECHF 1 September 2009 P _0 DEPT HEADS I�pLE DIA �IUYIL bIR To: Mayor Dave Romero and City Council members U<< WIV&_ (QDu�JC�L From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director C rrZi mG2 Re: Wineman Sidewalk Widening At its meeting today,the SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors unanimously voted to support the staff recommendation for the proposed sidewalk improvements of the Wineman retrofit project. Realizing that the project does create loss of five parking spaces and some Downtown Association members have expressed concern that this will negatively affect their businesses, the Board also took into consideration that the long-term benefits of the project would ultimately offset short-term hardship. In the Board's opinion,the amenities offered in this case uphold Downtown Association Strategic Plan goals and Council goals of making Downtown a pedestrian-friendly, experiential place to visit, shop, dine and do business,differentiating itself from other commercial districts in the region. The general consensus was that the tradeoff is acceptable because more foot traffic in the area will eventually result in increased sales for nearby businesses. Another point of discussion was that while the Downtown Association believes the City acted in accordance with its policies in approving the plans and moving ahead with the project, in this case clearer,more direct notification to pertinent parties early on would have been appropriate. The board's motion included the suggestion that the second part of the staff recommendation should be supported in establishing a threshold for notification in future projects. Regarding the notion of impact to Thursday Night Promotions Farmers Market, the Downtown Association can assure the Council that it will manage the market configuration to accommodate any changes the sidewalk widening creates. ATTACHMENT: Minutes, SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors 1 September 2009 cc: SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors Ken Porche, Charles Shoes RECEIVED Craig Smith, AIA R E C E I V E Ken Hampian, CAO, City of San Luis Obispo Robert Horch, Downtown Champion SEP 01 2009 SLO CITY CLERK SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors 1 September 2009 Downtown Association Office Minutes Present Natalie Tartaglia Tom Copeland Javier Cadena Kathy Collins Stephen Patrick Bob Schinkel John Huffman Brendan Welshons Tom Copeland Tres Feltman Carl Dudley Landy Fike Deborah Cash, staff Brent Vanderhoof, staff Diana Cotta, staff Erica Wood, intern Ken Hampian Robert Horch Ken Porche, Jr. Craig Smith Kathi Main Call to order by Tartaglia 7:34 AM. No public comment at this time. Motion to approve minutes by Feltman, 2"d by Welshons, PAIF. Wineman Sidewalk Widening Hampian: how government operates, more hands on? More creative? Usual process? In this case, a developer offered to provide amenities that aren't required, cafe dining to serve tenants,mission style tiles, historic street lamps, trees, tree grates; consistent with Council goals to improve DT DT needs to differentiate itself Signature improvements like Mission Plaza, DT Centre, Court St—they all involve tradeoffs, these projects made DT attractive and contemporary Look into the future, not being cavalier about losing parking, this is consistent with policy Horch: never like to lose parking,but parking isn't the destination,businesses are; there is still adequate parking A project like this will draw more people DT Hampian: Wineman project itself, very exciting to see it happening,historic preservation, seismic strengthening, affordable housing, creating unique sense of place, these amenities are icing on the cake, want project to be successful Main: Chamber supportive, in line with Chamber's vision and DT concept plan What it will bring to DT, will be so much more multi use, shopping Craig Smith, project architect Project is more than just the Wineman Building Chipolte Grill, Muzio's Grill 21 owners on project, master lease on property A true representation of public-private relationship `shoes to the tuxedo' a very depleted, worn sidewalk section; improvements are quite an undertaking '/ million dollar improvement (just the sidewalk area) not just the sidewalk, also the infrastructure City is forefront in adopting a sidewalk cafe ordinance; impetus to businesses along Higuera to take advantage of that Residential is complete, affordable units 13,000 sq ft of comm'l space about % spoken for better trash management restore to original 1929 look, even down to the color of the paint, type of windows restore original sign reuse, infill, smart growth looking for Board endorsement want to get this done quickly Dudley: seating on Chorro? No. Schinkel: electrical on Higuera for TNP? Yes Swem: developer's obligation? Smith: building had an agreement from the 1960s for a 50 car parking allowance, any change of use would require in lieu fee Swem: so change in use from hotel to residential, how did that affect? . Smith: change in use already existed when took over lease Dudley: deliveries? Smith: everything in the alley Tartaglia: how many apartments? Smith: 47 total, 30 are housing authority '/2 to moderate to low, '/� low working on overnight parking in structure Horch: from planning standpoint, DT living—people give up their cars Feltman: this has gone quickly, smoothly,have been through some long projects Tartaglia: why was no notice given? For our members; need to know Smith: This is a voluntary improvement,hopeful that other developers will do this same type of thing, time is money,has to go quickly but at it can be an objective that staff can work out so it's not protracted Swem: loss of revenue from the meters, going backwards with regard to parking the cars of the tenants While positive, still have concerns and offers a conflict with some of our members Smith: have to look at it in terms of public benefit, high and expensive commitment to public benefit; improvement greatly outweighs impact Hampian: this is different than the massive projects like Chinatown, Garden Street, etc. The project was nearly done and the developer came forward with an offer to add improvements; could have been more bureaucratic and taken longer It did happen fast,but in future will come back with `how can it be done better?; Not every day that someone comes forward like this Our long standing policies are to get people off the streets and into the structure Other than doing a better job of notifying people, would still make the same decision, the project has great benefit Dudley: originally thought losing five spaces was difficult; then thought about early 90s when we were losing people to Santa Maria then realized that you walk fewer steps from r parking structure than you walk at a mall; the enhanced foot traffic will improve the bottom line for the neighbor merchants, once you get through the emotion of not being informed Need to smooth the feathers Feltman: need to have electrical right at the tree to light them Smith: lighting the building at the pilasters Public comment: Porche: run conduit up the trunk of the tree and pointed the lights in the tree His issue is not with the project itself,had they had a meeting with the City earlier, would have saved a lot of problems Think the project is great but have a problem with giving five spaces to property owner with no notification Smith: understand the issue of parking, it is an important consideration in DT, a juggling act Fike: asked Porche about.his elderly customers and where they park; do they actually use the five spaces? A busy street, parallel parking difficult Porche: losing the parking does affect their business, elderly can't walk from the parking structure Horch: spoke with Cyndi Ashley about lowering time frame on meters in front of Charles Shoes, will work with Porche and Ashley on that; can also guarantee that the zone won't turn into loading or comm'1 Smith: notification was made as quickly as possible Porche: asked about completion date? Smith: if Council approves tonight, should have utilities in by Friday; project could be done w/in 2 weeks Main: should try and not trim trees on other side of street where fencing is Swem: spoke with Rick Porter, feels that the City should not go backward on their word to the developer Feltman: seems that everyone is in favor of the project, could have been handled better in terms of notification Dudley: lessons learned should be included r Hampian: the second recommendation is establishing a threshold for projects when parking removal is an issue Dudley: should also address TNP Swem: issue on lost revenue "Motion by Swem: DA support sidewalk widening with acknowledgement that notification concept be revised,2°d by Welshons Copeland: at very least DTA should be notified PAIF. Smith: on September 17`h, walkthrough TNP Diana introduced Erica Wood Slideshow presentation on Going Green at TNP Board discussed topics including: compliance, ease of conversion Change goal #4 to continue to participate Motion by Cadena, 2nd by Huffman to adopt Going Green at TNP Goals with modification of goal #4, PAIF. President's Report Tartaglia discussed the vacant Board seat; Swem stated he has spoken with Matt Quaglino and Matt has agreed to fill the remainder of the term if the Board feels he is appropriate Board agreed to ask Matt Quaglino to fill the vacant seat. City Liaison Horch discussed entertainment bus parking Other Bike Rack on Monterey Street TNP Schinkel: Veteran's celebration coming along, next meeting tomorrow. Meeting adjourned 9:41 AM. Prepared by D.Cash 9-1-09 Page 1 of 1 ®You forwarded this message on 9/1/2009 12:28 PM. Coun©1, SloCity From: rhporterco@aol.com [rhporterco@aol.com] Sent: Mon 8/31/2009 2:44 PM To: Council,SIoGty Cc: RECEIVED Subject: Higuera Street Bulbout Attachments: SEP 01 2009 Sirs and Madames, SLO CITY CLERK It is my understanding that a sidewalk bulb out was proposed by and a permit was granted to the owners/operators of a building in the 800 block of Higuera Street, (previously Copeland's for women), and it is in this regard as a long time downtown business and property owner, that I felt I could offer my thoughts. I do not suggest to know whether the the loss of the few close in on-street parking stalls will be offset by the greater appeal of the bulb out, nor whether the overall business volume of the downtown tenants will increase or decrease due to the same; but what I do know is that the permit was fairly issued and the owner/operators relied upon the City's word.They contracted for and proceeded with the work to construct the bulb out and further they contracted with and promised the same to their new potential tenants. If indeed the City's procedures are faulty,they should be altered,but not.mid-stream, not.at this owner's expense,and further, not at the additional detriment to all the other downtown Higuera and Chorro Street patrons,customers,tenants and owners now plagued by the additional disruption caused by the work stoppage.We now have neither parking nor bulb out, in fact we have no sidewalk,no tenants, more traffic congestion,and a true actual loss in business volume and the City taxes associated with it. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Rick Porter 846 Higuera Street#8 San Luis Obispo,Ca 805 543 5408 �iz� C°oPN �yjA-�� 7�ACLERKXRIG FDR RED FILE TTOAMEETING AGENDA DATE / D ITEM # $a �' PHEADS IR f JDC; I T7Pt[iun1E i auUC/C, �C/TIl /hG/L https:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/Higuera%20Street%2OB ulbout.EML... 9/1/2009 Page 1 of 1 r ®You forwarded this message on 9/1/2009 12:29 PM. Coundl, SloClty From: Matt Quaglino[mq@quaglino.com] Sent: Mon 6/31/2009 3:11 PM To: Council,SloCity Cc: _ Subject: sidewalk enhancement at the Wineman Hotel site RECEIVED Attachments: SEP 01 2009 Mr Mayor and Council Members: SLO CITY CLERK I want to voice my complete support for the proposed sidewalk enhancement plans proposed at the Wineman Hotel site. The widened sidewalk with the cafe seating and lighting will be enjoyed by hundreds everyday. The alternative as parking spaces for the convenience of a few is far outweighed by the long term benefits of our downtown. Years ago we participated with the cities pilot program to install a bulb-out at our Court St property which was the original home of Mo's BBQ, now the home of Peet's Coffee. Use this site as an example of success with sidewalk bulb-outs and ask yourself which would I rather have, a few parked cars or cafe tables that can be enjoyed by everyone as a place to relax, visit with our neighbors and support the local businesses. I can understand the hesitation of some but I do believe in the long run everyone including the skeptics will benefit from the proposed plan. Thank you for your time and consideration. Matt Quaglino H747Lt P E/jIRIL C1 COUNCIL QJCDD DIP RED FILE ffeA �nYrr[c20 FIN DIP Matthew Quaglino - MEETIIINyG AGENDA p q�NNEEYY�IRE CHIEF DATEY/ t ITEM # LERI /oRIG PW DIP I' REPT H Q�POLICE CHF Quaglino Properties �,4 I HEADS 2rREC DIP Lyi UTIL DIA 815 Fiero Lane �_E-5 21HR DIi1 T2.f�Ia E ��yu(r San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.543.0560 P � 805.543.0214 F https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/sidewalk%20enhancement%20at%20... 9/1/2009 Page 1 of 1 i ®You forwarded this message on 9/1/2009 12:26 PM. Council, SloCity From: sales[sales@fordens.com] Sent: Mon 8/31/2009 3:34 PM To: Council, SloCity Subject: against removal of parking spaces on Higuera . RECEIVE® Attachments: SEP O 12009 Dear Mayor&Council Members: SLO CITY CLERK It has come to my attention that you are considering removing five parking spaces in the 800 block of Higuera. I strongly oppose this idea. We are not in need of less on-street parking. Many spaces have already been removed with pop-outs and changes to sidewalk configurations in recent months and years. We need to keep every possible on-street parking space if we expect to retain a vital downtown. There are many people unable to walk any distance due to physical limitations. Parking structures are of no help to these people. They need nearby on-street parking to encourage them to shop and eat downtown. If the customer base shrinks so does the tax revenue which will negatively impact the city budget. Please re- consider the idea to eliminate any additional parking! Dean Moore Forden's l'(�L Co E�Llf7zL 0OUNCIL M-CDD DIR RED FILE I-eA'7e/n1fi&92 [7"PIN DIR R-AGAeASNe y4Q,CCTIFIRECHIEF MEE 1NG AGENDAf��TORNEY [EpW DIR / DAT q o ITEM # SoZ CLERK/ORIG aPOLICECHF ❑ DEPT HEADS DIRK DIR r^i P U3 2-UTIL DIR `rlZiBN� 1-IIR f)Ii1 / ln/lcr.�lTin7E5' r-G°BL�aJc`1L '-Gze�t /itG2 hnps:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/against%20removal%20ofO/o20parkin... 9/1/2009 Page 1 of 1 Council,Slocity From: Greg Notley[greg@powercomengineering.com] Sent: Tue 9/1/2009 1:39 PM To: Council, SloCity Cc: Subject: Wineman popout Attachments: I would like to express my support for the pedestrian bulb-out being proposed in front of the Wineman Hotel.As a member of the SLO County Bike Coalition (and a downtown businessman)I see this as a continued step toward ensuring a long term and vibrant pedestrian scale and pace to this critical heart of our town.Yes existing parking will be lost but in the overall plan that will be solved also. What we gain is simply of greater value.Thanks for your consideration. Greg A. Notley, P.E. Power and Communications Engineering ®[� 1009 Morro St.Suite 205 RECEIVED San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 SEP 0 1 2009 (805)541-9700 SLO CITY CLERK Co/ I 6WA1L COUNCIL C°1 CDD DIR RED FILE a.rvAQGT�i�rG.t- FIN DIR Q'AGAc0I R E C H I E F I MEETING AGENDA E'1 ATTORNEY Z'PW DIR 5CLERK/ORIG ZPIOLICE CHF ISME-1ZI&L ITEM/ 4 802 j ❑ DEPT HEADS L"REC DIR '[7" Pi- - �� ('"1�1J I I6 DIR -77Z-1 C' 1A DI i � AlC-r,)nmf-s i Cou n1G� N-CE2t,C https://mail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncil/Inbox/Wineman%20popout.EML?Cmd=open 9/1/2009