Front Page  »  

SLO man dies after questionable fall from rooftop

September 24, 2016

The body of a 72-year-old man was discovered Friday afternoon on the first floor rooftop of the Anderson Hotel on Monterey Street in San Luis Obispo. He had fallen from an apartment on an undisclosed upper floor.

Police investigators are working to determine if the man’s fall was criminal or accidental, police said.

Shortly after 1 p.m., police responded to a report of an injured person on a rooftop and discovered a man suffering from significant injuries. Emergency responders transported the victim to Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead.

Officials are not releasing the man’s name until after his family has been notified of his death.

Police are asking anyone with information about the fall to call the police department at 805-781-7312 or leave an anonymous tip at Crime Stoppers at 805-549-STOP.


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Restricting the Anderson Hotel to senior and disabled tenants always seemed like a poor choice to me. It doesn’t seem like a very safe building for seniors and this accident demonstrates that pretty well. Also the noise and crowds of downtown life don’t seem that ideal for that demographic either. There is a high demand for downtown units, especially for young professionals, so it would make sense to open this building up to anyone interested in living there.


0

There you go paragon, lets evict all of those older and disabled folks and replace them with your “young professionals”! Why not, right?


Where would they go? Those you would displace, maybe your house? Because after all it is single story (less chance of falling from any real height) its probably somewhere “quieter” too, right? You’re an idiot… Taking a tragedy like this and some how blaming it on the building and the age and condition of its residents and using to dispalce two of the the most vulnerable groups of people in this country (no, not “demgraphic”, PEOPLE you idiot!) is so stupid on so many levels it isn’t funny!


One of the few true “affordable housing” options for low income people to be replaced by “paragon tower” ! Ah the bliss of being young and so obvisiously removed from reality…


0

The SLO “young professionals” (AKA “yuppies”) have declared generational warfare on all of the rest of the citizenry. They want it, and they want it now, on their own terms. Don’t think they should have to work for it like grandma and grandpa did. What a self-centered generation they present.


0

I never said anything about evicting anyone, but thanks for being the token hysterical troll that inevitably shows up in this type of discussions and gets their panties in a bunch. I suggested that we stop discriminating against certain people by preventing them from renting these units just because they aren’t of a certain age. Try replacing the “under a certain age” disqualification with “over a certain age”, “of a certain race” or “of a certain religion” and you will understand how discriminatory this policy is. We need to stop this housing socialism, open up these units to everyone, and let the free market do what it does best.


And yes, a single story unit is much better for older people who won’t have to climb stairs and potentially fall out of high windows. There are plenty of great housing options for seniors in SLO that aren’t downtown and that aren’t the tallest building in SLO. I would never want any of the older members of my family living in that deathtrap.


0

You speak of “discrimitory practices” without taking into account the side effect(s) of out of reach housing costs for that “demographic” you speak of. The cost of “normal” housing is WAY out of reach for those you would want to displace, either current tenants or the ones who wouldn’t have the opportunity to live their because a “young professional” has taken up that home, and there is no sign of that cost going down any time soon!


Your free market system has all but restricted the most of us from participating and you know why! It ain’t free! You got to pay to participate! You know that and those who are the biggest participators and proponents of it know it.


Discrimination is allowed under certain circumstances, especially where it’s used to insure those that are at the biggest risk get all that they need. What your version of “free market” DOES BEST is price these folks right out of contention especially in the overpriced housing market that SLO exemplifies so well. And while you spew this crap about discrimination the lawfully accepted practise of restricting rentals to those who only qualify if there rent only represents the expenditure of 1/3 of their given income(s) is seen as protection and fiscal responsibility.


I currently rent a one bedroom, one bath “cabin” in Oregon. It is old and well worn (comfortable is the term I like to use), it keeps me warm and dry, off the streets and is in one of the most beautifully pristine recreational encouraging environments on the planet (so, it’s good for my overall health as well) with lakes, hills, forest, rivers and wildlife all within WALKING distance. What would that cost me in SLO? In California? Somewhere between what? One or two thousand bucks a month, at least! Right?!!! Here it’s $295.00 a month. No, its not subsidized housing, section 8 or otherwise! That’s my rent. With the very affordable utilities here (they aren’t pushin’ the huge amount voltage here that they do in Cali’) my “non-controllables” average right around $395.00 a month (a free market person would know what that means). The average rent for a one bedroom, one bath apartment here? $350.00 a month. The average monthly utility bill? Less than $125.00 a month and it snows here!


You’re right, there are great housing opportunities in SLO for seniors and the disabled, the problem is the need out weighs the inventory. The Anderson has a waiting list of 4+ years (if my memory serves me well) while all other “affordable income based” housing is either just a little less than that or right at it. Take the Anderson out of that eqaution and those times would only increase.


Have you ever been in the Anderson? I have been. Not only is well taken care of it has an elevator! Suuuprise, suuurprise, suuuuuuprise, there Gomer! And you make it sound like there has been or will be an epodemic of old and disabled folks falling out windows (a Google search only revealed one accidental death of any type involving a tenant at the Anderson, this one!)! Do you know something we don’t or do you have a plan in mind? I’m just asking…


I do have to admire your use of “socialism” and “free market” all in the same comment. You must be Republican? If not? You sure do use their “talking points” rather well whenever someone, including the disabled and elderly, threaten your version of a “free market”….


I’m sorry, isn’t your contention that you wouldn’t want any of your friends, family or loved ones living in that deathtrap a bit disingenouos if not hypocritical on your part? Hell yea, it has to be! Especially when you lobby to open up some of those “deathtraps” to young professionals while taking them away from the “social housing” market, right? Oops! Another case of foot-in-mouth disease…


0

Paragon, I understand that the trend in cities has been to squeeze out low to moderate income persons. Re developers have made it impossible for those who are not wealthy to live in them. For several decades now developers have been scooping up at one time affordable properties to make the biggest return possible.

This has effectively driven out everyone except the most affluent.


Many properties have also become unrentable due to the exorberant rents and lack of tenants able or willing to pay the asking.


Slo is already overpriced for many people, driving would be tenants elsewhere. Young professional adults are the last demographic that needs more housing.The city already caters to them.


0

Maybe Professor Plum on the rooftop hit him with the candlestick?


0