HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-19-2015 SS1 Rowley (2)Lomeli, Monique
Subject: FW: Neighborhood Wellness /Civility
Attachments: SS1 Civility Rpt 5- 19- 2015.doc
From: Sandra Rowley fmailto:macsar99(ayahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 7:48 AM
To: Marx, Jan; Ashbaugh, John; Carpenter, Dan; Christianson, Carlyn; Rivoire, Dan
Cc: Mejia, Anthony
Subject: Neighborhood Wellness /Civility
Attached please find a letter from Residents for Quality Neighborhoods.
MAY 19 2015 �
COUNCIL MEETING: 05 bAL�-Wt:5'
ITEM NO.: SS 1�12.� ?kJ `-�
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
P.O. Box 12604 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
May 19, 2015
Subject: SS1, Neighborhood Wellness /Community Civility Working Group Recommendations
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the Council,
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods strongly supported formation of this group and is pleased to see the
report they have produced. There are many excellent recommendations included, however, as time is short
we will concentrate on items we do not think should be pursued and those we think should be altered or
added.
Objective 1. (pg SS1 -10)
We were disappointed that stricter enforcement of current ordinances, especially those associated with
noise, was not listed as a recommended action. Residents have tried making friends with their student
neighbors and SLOPD has supplied door hangers in student -heavy neighborhoods and post cards to owners
of rentals with minimal, if any, success. We still have an average of well over 100 noise complaints each
month. We believe that stricter enforcement should at least be considered.
Objective 2. (pp SS1- 12/13)
1. Recommendation #4. Although the recommendation deals with the downtown, it includes safety issues
and we see neighborhood safety as an integral part. When inebriated individuals walk from downtown to
their homes they inevitably travel through neighborhoods. We hope some thought will be given to directing
them onto major thoroughfares to the maximum extent possible, minimizing neighborhood cut - through and
vandalism. We recommend this be added to the Desired Outcomes.
2. Recommendation #7. A reduction in traffic issues is mentioned. We believe it is equally important to
include strategies to reduce parking issues in neighborhoods. Recommend "reduce parking issues" be added.
Objective 3. (pp SS1- 19/20)
1. Recommendation #2. We see two problems with the city generating a map of rental properties: (1) Not
all rental properties are available at any given time. Tenants could be disturbed by individuals looking for
rental housing using the map as their guide — and no owner wants their tenant(s) to be unnecessarily
disturbed; (2) Frequently updating the map would be time consuming, an owner- occupied home can become
an rental and, although less often, a rental can become owner - occupied. There would probably be a delay in
receiving this information and updating the map, potentially creating confusion and frustration for all. In
addition, owners and property managers do not appear to have difficulty advertising their properties.
2. Recommendation #4. We strongly suggest the Desired Outcome read "Raise awareness of the impacts of
noise and crime on neighborhood." The addition of "and crime" would include the monetary and emotional
effects of vandalism, the potential effects of broken bottles on people and pets, etc.
3. Recommendation #5. We definitely think the Desired Outcome of a party registration program should be
"Fewer neighborhood disturbances" rather than "Fewer noise citations."
4. Recommendation #9. Although generally discussed on page SS1 -17, we think it is important that personal
responsibility and citizenship be included on the chart as a Desired Outcome in addition to education about
policies and ordinances.
5. Recommendation #10. We would like to see Cal Poly and Cuesta police included as partners for "Knock
and Talk" activities. In some instances seeing an officer from your university or college at the door may have
more impact than seeing a SLOPD officer.
Objective 4. (pg SS1 -26) Reference Recommendation #3, SCLC is shown as the lead, but there are no
partners listed. We believe that changing the student culture related to neighborhood wellness is not
something that can be accomplished by one group, even if that group has a diverse membership. We believe
it will require a number of partners, such as Cal Poly, Cuesta, RQN and other neighborhood groups, the Greek
community, various campus clubs, downtown business owners and the city, and all of them should be listed.
Obiective 6. (pg SS1 -30) Neighborhood Wellness, including that of our student -heavy neighborhoods, is the
City's responsibility - ultimately falling to the City Council. As with other city responsibilities, input and
assistance from several areas of the community are required to develop, implement and evaluate solutions
to neighborhood wellness problems. Although SCLC is an important and valuable part of the community, it
does not have the continuity of leadership required to monitor and evaluate city policies and programs over
time. We do not believe SCLC should be the lead for all four of the recommended actions.
1. Recommendation #1. We believe SLOPD and the Community Development Department are the best
positioned to be the lead in monitoring the success, or lack thereof, of adopted policies and programs,
reporting annually with input from SCLC (Recommendation #2), neighborhood and community groups, and
other involved individuals.
2. Recommendation #4. We think the City Council is the appropriate body to hold a Town Hall meeting.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to this important Neighborhood Wellness recommendation
and for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Sandra Rowley
Chairperson, RQN
2