San Luis Obispo City Council
April 2, 2024

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 79
O ______
to placement of vehicles, mats, utensils, etc., FSE staff shall immediately remove such obstacles upon city entry for inspection.

2. Inspections may occur during normal operating hours without warning to verify appropriate Grease Control Device maintenance and operation as well as during an emergency response or blockage investigation. Inspections will include all parts of the FSE that discharge or have the potential to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. City representatives will comply with all reasonable facility safety requirements as provided by the FSE operator at the time of entry.

3. Below is an outline of the city’s routine inspection and enforcement procedures. a) Inspect the GCD by assessing the amount of grease and solids as a percentage of the total volume.
b) Inspect the structural integrity of the GCD;
c) Assess whether the GCD maintenance frequency is sufficient as defined by Section 13.08.093 (Maintenance and Operation of Grease Control Devices); d) Inspect that all floor drains have strainer baskets not to exceed 3/16-inches in hole diameter;
e) Ensure that all kitchen best management practices are being implemented as set fourth in §§13.08.091(G)to minimize FOG from entering the sewer; and f) Inspect recycled oil storage and trash areas for cleanliness and compliance with applicable stormwater codes (SLOMC 12.08)
G. Kitchen best management practices.

The following Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be followed by all FSEs:
a. Always dry wipe all pots, pans, and cooking equipment to remove leftover fat, oil, grease, and food waste prior to pre-rinsing or washing. b. Install and maintain screens in all floor and sink drains. The floor drain screens must be a basket style and have a hole diameter of 3/16-inches or smaller.

Dome style strainers are prohibited. The sink drains must be a fine mesh style, where applicable, or a similar type approved by the director. c. Maintain Grease Control Device(s) (GCD) to comply with the following:

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 80
O ______
i. In accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions when the grease storage capacity of the GCD can be validated to exceed 25 percent of the total liquid volume by third-party performance testing; or ii. If the grease storage capacity of the GCD cannot be validated by thirdparty performance testing, the total depth of the floating FOG layer, plus the settled sludge layer cannot exceed 25% or more of the total liquid depth of the GCD.
d. Regularly maintain vent hood and filters and dispose of the waste to a drainage fixture connected to a GCD.
e. Wash all floor mats, grills, and greasy kitchen equipment in a drainage fixture connected to a GCD. Never wash equipment outside.
f. Place source-separated food and green waste in the organic material container pursuant to SLOMC 08.04.213.
g. Display the F.O.G. poster for all employees to see, ideally in the kitchen or dishwashing area.
h. Place “No Grease” stickers in dishwashing areas. Stickers are provided by the city at no charge and are available in English and Spanish.

H. Staff training requirements.

1. An annual training on kitchen BMPs as stated in Subsection13.08.091(G) must be completed and documented for all staff. Records of this training must be kept on site for a minimum of three years and must be made available to city staff upon request during an inspection.

2. The training record must include the following:
a) What was covered during the training.
b) A list of names and signatures of all who attended the training.

I. Any FSE undergoing a kitchen remodel, as defined in Section 13.08.020, shall be required to submit GCD plans to the city for review.

J. Any FSE or other facilities identified under subsection 13.08.090(C) must notify the city within 30 days, and may be required to install a Grease Control Device, when any of the following changes occur or are planned:

1. Facility or operational modifications;

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 81
O ______

2. Changes to the type of food service;

3. Change of operator of the facility; or

4. Installation of a new GCD or transfer of responsibility for a GCD.

13.08.092 Grease control device requirements.

A. GCDs must be sized according to both of the following steps:

1. Calculate Flow Rate
The minimum flow rate for a GCD may be calculated by either fixture volume or pipe diameter, as stated in the CPC, using either a one-minute or two-minute drainage period. Use a one-minute drainage period when the GCD will be installed within 20 feet of directly connected fixtures and/or has indirectly connected fixtures. When the interceptor will be installed beyond 20 feet of the connected fixtures, use a twominute drainage period.

Note, per §§13.08.092(I) , each GCD shall receive the drainage from all plumbing fixtures, equipment, and drain lines located in the food preparation, food service, alcohol service, and clean-up areas of FSE’s, including but not limited to multicompartment sinks, utensil sinks, food preparation sinks, pre-rinse sinks, dishwashers, hand washing sinks, floor sinks, floor drains, trench drains, and mop sinks.

2. Calculate Grease Capacity
Once the minimum flow rate has been established in step one, calculate the minimum grease storage capacity for the GCD required for the desired cleaning frequency, noting that required cleaning cannot be more frequent than 90 days. Use the following formula to correctly calculate the grease capacity required.

Grease factor
from Table X X
Meals or
customers per
day
X
Days
between
cleaning
=
Grease
capacity
required (lbs)
To determine the appropriate grease factor, using the table on the following page, select the menu type (1 through 33), then the correct column (A through D) for whether there is a fryer, and whether the establishment uses disposable or washable plates, glasses, knives, forks, and spoons (flatware). The table was produced from guidance in the American Society of Plumbing Engineers (ASPE) Plumbing Engineering Design Handbook 4, Plumbing Components and Equipment, Chapter 8, Grease Interceptors.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 82
O ______
B. The approved GCD will meet the minimum flow rate from step one and the minimum grease capacity from step two above. In order to meet the minimum grease capacity

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 83
O ______
in step two, a GCD with a higher flow rate may be required than is determined in step one.

C. Prior to installing or replacing a GCD as may be required by this chapter, FSEs must complete the city’s GCD Sizing and Selection Worksheet with all required information and submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval.

Incomplete worksheets submitted will not be accepted and could delay project approval.

D. All FSEs installing or replacing a GCD pursuant to this chapter must submit a building permit application and the following documents to the Community Development Department:

1. Map/drawing of all plumbing fixtures that will discharge to the proposed GCD.

2. Calculations for sizing of proposed GCD on the City’s GCD Sizing and Selection Worksheet

3. Manufacturer’s specification sheet of proposed GCD. (see below for prohibited materials and conditions of approval)
E. The following CGDs are prohibited unless otherwise approved by the director:

1. Gravity grease interceptors.

2. Grease removal devices built from concrete.

3. GCDs built from metal, including metal GCDs with Acid Resistant Enamel or Epoxy Coatings.

F. Any facility identified as needing to install or replace a GCD must do so in accordance with this chapter within 180 days of notification from the city, unless approved otherwise by the director.

Hydromechanical Grease Interceptors (HGIs) shall meet the following minimum requirements:

1. Be constructed of a corrosion resistant polymer

2. No injection ports for chemicals or bacteria.

3. Installed per manufacturer's specifications.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 84
O ______

4. Appropriate flow restrictors, whether integral or external to the device, must be installed.

5. Shall meet the specifications and be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Plumbing Code.

6. Shall be third party tested and rated for efficiency and capacity in accordance with ASME A112.14.3, CSA B481, or PDI G101.

G. Each GCD shall be installed and connected at an exterior location such that it is at all times easily accessible for visual inspection, sampling, cleaning and removal of grease and other matter from all surfaces. The location of the GCD must be approved by the County, and shall not be located in a food or utensil handling area unless specifically approved by the County. The GCD must be installed prior to final city permit inspections.

H. A GCD shall be situated outdoors on the FSE’s premises, except when such a location would be impractical or cause undue hardship on the FSE. The city may issue an encroachment permit to allow the GCD to be installed in the public street or sidewalk area and located so that it will not be obstructed by landscaping or parked vehicles. If the GCD cannot be located outdoors pursuant to the terms of this provision, and the city does not issue an encroachment permit, then the FSE may install a GCD at an approved interior location that meets the requirements of applicable plumbing codes and this chapter at the discretion of the director.

I. Each GCD shall receive the drainage from all plumbing fixtures, equipment, and drain lines located in the food preparation, food service, alcohol service, and clean-up areas of FSE’s, including but not limited to multi-compartment sinks, utensil sinks, food preparation sinks, pre-rinse sinks, dishwashers, hand washing sinks, floor sinks, floor drains, trench drains, and mop sinks.

J. All FSEs shall ensure that wastes collected by GCDs are disposed of at a facility permitted to receive such wastes. FOG wastes must not be allowed to discharge to any private or public portion of the sanitary or stormwater collection systems.

K. The of use of additives, emulsifiers, enzymes, or biological agents to break down or digest FOG for discharge to the sewer system is prohibited, unless authorized by the utilities director.

L. Food Waste Disposers are prohibited.

M. Any waste material from routine cleaning of exhaust hoods, ducts, floor mats, and mop water shall be plumbed to the GCD prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 85
O ______
N. No drains from toilets, showers, or other domestic discharges shall be connected to the GCD.

13.08.093 Maintenance and operation of grease control devices.

A. GCDs shall be maintained in efficient operating condition by periodic removal of the accumulated grease. No accumulated grease shall be introduced into any drainage piping or public or private sewer. The total depth of FOG layer shall not exceed the maximum rated capacity as established by the manufacturer of the GCD. If this information is not available, then the FOG layer plus the settled sludge layer cannot exceed 25% or more of the total liquid depth of the GCD.

B. GCDs shall be cleaned on a sufficient frequency to prevent objectionable odors, surcharge of the GCD, or interference with the operation of the sanitary sewer system.

The required minimum frequency for maintaining the GCDs shall be determined during a routine inspection. A re-inspection may be requested to re-evaluate the required cleaning frequency. In the absence of a frequency determined and set by the City, the following is the required minimum frequency of cleaning for each type of GCD, unless otherwise approved by the director:

1. HGIs shall be cleaned at least once every thirty days.

2. Non-conforming existing GGIs shall be cleaned at least once every ninety days.

C. If a GCD is properly sized and installed, yet requires cleaning and maintenance at a greater frequency than the frequency determined in accordance with this section, then the director can require a GCD with a higher flow rate and grease capacity to be installed.

D. GCDs shall be cleaned by being pumped dry and all accumulated sludge on all surfaces shall be removed by washing down the sides, baffles, tees, and any other interior components. No water removed from the device during cleaning shall be returned to the GCD.

E. The director may grant an exception to the requirements of subsections

13.08.093(B)(1) and (2) where the director finds, based on evidence presented by the FSE, that a less frequent cleaning schedule will be sufficient to assure that the GCD will continue to operate efficiently and will not bypass FOG to the sanitary sewer system. The director may require more frequent cleaning if inspections indicate that cleaning at the current frequency is not adequate. Documentation provided by the

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 86
O ______
FSE shall be based on a minimum of one year of cleaning and shall be verified by city inspections.

Waste hauler requirements - All GCD cleaning shall be performed by waste haulers who are certified by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) as an “inedible kitchen grease commercial transporter.” The pumper shall transport the pumped waste to an “authorized receiving facility,” as defined by the DFA.

F. Persons cleaning a GCD shall ensure that all grease and sediment is removed and appropriately disposed. They shall also ensure that all baffles, flow control devices, and other equipment are properly installed subsequent to the cleaning. All wastes removed from the GCD during cleaning shall be placed in a dedicated container and be removed by a “ inedible kitchen grease commercial transporter,” as described above. The waste may not be placed in the used cooking oil container, unless the grease hauler provides written certification that this is acceptable, and the hauler complies with all DFA regulations for “inedible kitchen grease.” G. FSEs may not clean GCDs themselves, unless specific approval is granted by the director.

H. All FSEs shall implement best management practices (BMPs) in their operations to minimize the discharge of grease to the sanitary sewer system. See subsection

13.08.091(G).

I. Abandoned GCDs shall be pumped empty, thoroughly cleaned, and filled as required by the California Plumbing Code.

13.08.094 Maintenance reporting requirements for grease control devices.

A. Within one week of each cleaning, the FSE shall submit proof of cleaning by utilizing the City’s online portal.

B. The following are required when reporting the cleaning of a GCD:

1. Date of cleaning

2. Name of waste hauler that performed the cleaning

3. Copy of invoice or manifest provided by the hauler
C. If the City’s online portal is unavailable, one of the following alternative methods is acceptable:

1. Email; ([email protected]) or

2. Mail or hand delivery to:

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 87
O ______
City of San Luis Obispo
Attn: Environmental Programs
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

3. Facility operators will bear the ultimate responsibility for providing maintenance records even if using a waste hauler to conduct maintenance of GCDs.

13.08.095 Fats, oils, and grease discharge control retrofit requirements.

A. Gravity Grease Interceptors (GGIs) have been demonstrated to pose numerous issues including, but not limited to: short-circuiting, production of hydrogen sulfide gas, production of sulfuric acid, and corrosion of the concrete interceptor. Hydromechanical grease interceptors (HGIs) are performance tested and rated by an independent thirdparty. As such, they are given a grease capacity rating that has been verified. All food service establishments, new construction, tenant improvement, or kitchen remodels, as defined in Section 13.08.020, established, approved, or completed after July 1, 2024 shall be required to install a HGI in accordance with this section.

B. Facilities may be required to plumb all fixtures to and/or install a new GCD per Section

13.08.092 in any of the following situations:

1. FSE has caused or contributed to a FOG-related blockage, build-up, or the need for increased maintenance of a city sewer; or

2. FSE has improperly installed or sized the GCD per Section 13.08.092;

3. Current sizing requires servicing more frequently than 30 days for HGIs or 90 days for GGIs; or

4. As determined by the director.

13.08.096 Fats, oils and grease control discharge program violations.

Violations of this chapter include, but are not limited to, the following and may be enforced administratively pursuant to SLOMC Chapter 1.24, civilly or criminally:

A. Failure to install required GCD;
B. Failure to maintain GCD in accordance with this Chapter; C. Failure to notify the city of a change of ownership, operation or other use as required by subsection 13.08.091(J);
D. Failure to provide sampling access or entry to the facility for compliance inspections;

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 88
O ______
E. Use of emulsifiers, additives, enzymes and biological agents designed to breakdown/digest FOG for discharge to the sewer system; F. Failure to submit maintenance-reporting documents as required by Section 13.08.094; G. Failure to connect all FOG-producing fixtures to the required interceptor or FOGremoval equipment per city standards; H. Failure to clean a grease interceptor at the frequency required under Section

13.08.093; or
I. Failure to dispose of FOG waste at an approved facility.

13.08.130 Measurements and tests.

A. All measurements, tests and analyses of the characteristics of water and wastes shall be determined by the testing procedures specified in 40 CFR Part 136. When required by the director, the industrial user shall provide safe and secure access to the proper sampling point for the determination of compliance with federal categorical standards and/or local discharge limits. This may require the installation of a control manhole as described in Section 13.08.120. All testing shall be performed by an accredited approved laboratory and conducted at the expense of the discharger.

B. When requested by the director, a user must submit information on the nature and characteristics of its wastewater within thirty days of the request. The director is authorized to prepare a form for this purpose and may periodically require users to update this information. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.140 Powers and authority of inspectors.

A. Inspection of Premises. The director or other duly authorized employees or representatives of the city bearing proper credentials and identification shall be readily permitted to enter all properties for the purposes of inspection, observation, record examination and copying, measurement, sampling, and testing in accordance with the provisions of this chapter at all reasonable times. If the director, health officer, or other duly authorized employee or representative of the city or the health department has reasonable cause to believe that wastewater discharge conditions on or emanating from a facility are so hazardous, unsafe or dangerous as to require immediate inspection to

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 89
O ______
safeguard public health or safety or the integrity of the POTW, they shall have the right to immediately enter and inspect the property and may use any reasonable means required to effect such entry and make such inspection.

B. The director shall have the right to set up on the user’s property, or require installation of, such devices as necessary to conduct sampling and/or metering of the user’s operations. The director may require the user to install monitoring equipment as necessary. The facility’s sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating condition by the user at its own expense. Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be inspected and/or sampled shall be removed by the user at the written or verbal request of the director and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access shall be borne by the user. Unreasonable delays in allowing access to the user’s premises shall be a violation of this chapter.

C. Cost of Inspection. Each discharger shall pay a reasonable inspection fee sufficient to cover the costs of the inspection and regulation of discharge. Such costs may be incorporated in the industrial user wastewater discharge permit fee.

D. Rights of City Entry. The director or other duly authorized employees of the city bearing proper credentials and identification shall be permitted to enter all private properties through which the city holds a duly negotiated easement for the purposes of, but not limited to, inspection, observation, measurement, sampling, repair and maintenance of any portion of the POTW. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.150 Permit—Required—Term—Transfer—Revocation—Completion of an industrial user’s survey required.

A. Permit Application.

1. Industrial users required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit shall complete and file an industrial wastewater discharge permit application with the city within thirty days of receiving a notice to apply. Proposed new IUs shall apply ninety days prior to actual connection to the municipal sewer.

2. In support of its application, the applicant must submit the information requested in the application form issued by the city.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 90
O ______

3. The director will evaluate the data furnished by the IU and may require additional information. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be processed and will be returned to the IU for revision. After evaluation and acceptance of the information furnished, the director may issue an industrial wastewater discharge permit subject to the terms and conditions provided herein.

4. All industrial wastewater discharge permit applications, IU reports, and certification statements must be signed by an authorized representative of the IU and contain the certification statement set forth in Section 13.08.300.

5. If the designation of an authorized representative is no longer accurate because a different individual or position has assumed responsibility either for the overall operation of the facility or for the overall environmental matters of the company, a new written authorization satisfying the requirements of this section must be submitted to the director prior to, or together with, any reports to be signed by an authorized representative.

6. A denial of a permit application may be appealed pursuant to the procedures in Section 13.08.480.

B. Permit Conditions. Wastewater discharge permits shall be expressly subject to all provisions of this chapter and all other regulations, user charges and fees established by the city. The conditions of wastewater discharge permits shall be uniformly enforced by the director in accordance with this chapter, and applicable state and federal regulations.

Permit requirements may include but not be limited to the following:

1. A statement that indicates the industrial wastewater discharge permit issuance date, expiration date, and effective date;

2. A statement that the industrial wastewater discharge permit is nontransferable;

3. Effluent limits, which may include numerical limits or best management practices based on applicable pretreatment standards;

4. Self-monitoring, sampling, reporting, notification, and record-keeping requirements. These requirements shall include an identification of pollutants or best management practices to be monitored, sampling location, sampling frequency, and sample type based on federal, state, and local law;

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 91
O ______

5. Requirements to control slug discharges, if determined by the director to be necessary;

6. Limits on the average and/or maximum rate of discharge, time of discharge, and/or requirements for flow regulation and equalization;

7. Requirements for the installation of pretreatment technology, pollution control, or construction of appropriate containment devices, designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent the introduction of pollutants into the treatment works;

8. Requirements for the development and implementation of spill control plans or other special conditions including management practices necessary to adequately prevent accidental, unanticipated, or nonroutine discharges;

9. Development and implementation of waste minimization plans to reduce the amount of pollutants discharged to the POTW;

10. Requirements for installation and maintenance of inspection and sampling facilities and equipment, including flow measurement devices;

11. A statement that compliance with the industrial wastewater discharge permit does not relieve the permittee of responsibility for compliance with all applicable federal and state pretreatment standards, including those which become effective during the term of the industrial wastewater discharge permit;

12. Other conditions as deemed appropriate by the director to ensure compliance with this chapter and state and federal laws, rules, and regulations; and

13. A statement of applicable civil and criminal penalties for violation of pretreatment standards and requirements, and any applicable compliance schedule. Such schedule may not extend the time for compliance beyond that required by applicable federal, state, or local law.

C. Permit Modification.

1. The director may modify any industrial wastewater discharge permit for good cause, including but not limited to, the following reasons:
a. To incorporate any new or revised federal, state, or local pretreatment standards or requirements;

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 92
O ______
b. To address significant alterations or additions to the IU’s operation, processes, or wastewater volume or character since the time of the industrial wastewater discharge permit issuance;
c. To add information indicating that the permitted discharge poses a threat to the city’s POTW, personnel, or the receiving waters;
d. In light of a violation of any terms or conditions of the industrial wastewater discharge permit;
e. In light of misrepresentations or failure to fully disclose all relevant facts in the industrial wastewater discharge permit application or in any required reporting; f. To correct typographical or other errors in the industrial wastewater discharge permit.

2. An IU shall be informed of any proposed changes in its permit at least thirty calendar days prior to the effective date of the change.

D. Duration of Permits. Permits shall be issued for a specified time period, not to exceed five years. A permit may be issued for a period of less than one year or may be stated to expire on a specific date. The terms and conditions of the permit may be subject to modification and change by the director during the life of the permit as limitations or requirements as identified in this chapter are modified and changed. The user shall be informed of any proposed changes in his or her permit at least thirty days prior to the effective date of change. Any changes or new conditions in the permit shall include a reasonable time schedule for compliance.

E. Transfer of a Permit. Wastewater discharge permits are issued to a specific user for a specific operation. An industrial wastewater discharge permit shall not be reassigned or transferred or sold to a new owner, new user, different premises, or a new or changed operation; provided, that if in the opinion of the director, the sale or transfer of an operation does not result in a change in use, the permit may be reassigned.

F. Revocation of Permit. Any user is subject to permit revocation upon who violatesviolation of any of the conditions of this chapter, or applicable state and federal regulations, or any of the following conditions, is subject to permit revocationany of the following conduct:

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 93
O ______

1. Failure to notify the director of significant changes to the IU’s operations, systems, or wastewater prior to the changed discharge;

2. Misrepresentation or failure to fully disclose all relevant facts in the industrial wastewater discharge permit application;

3. Falsifying self-monitoring reports and certification statements;

4. Tampering with monitoring equipment;

5. Refusing to allow the director timely access to facility premises and records;

6. Failure to meet effluent limitations;

7. Failure to pay fines;

8. Failure to provide advance notice of the transfer of business ownership of a permitted facility;

9. Failure to meet compliance schedules; or

10. Violation of any pretreatment standard or requirement or of any terms of the industrial wastewater discharge permit or of this chapter.

G. Industrial wastewater discharge permits shall be voidable upon cessation of operations or transfer of business ownership. All industrial wastewater discharge permits issued to an IU are void upon the issuance of a new industrial wastewater discharge permit to that IU. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.160 Reporting requirements for permittees.

A. Any discharger of nondomestic wastewater may be required to submit to the director a report indicating the nature, concentration and daily flows of all limiting pollutants. The report shall also state whether the applicable pretreatment standards and requirements are being consistently met.

B. After meeting the requirements set forth in subsection A of this section, the user shall submit self-monitoring reports, as required by the director, to assess and assure continued compliance with pretreatment standards and requirements, including, but not

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 94
O ______
limited to, the reports required in 40 CFR 403.12. These reports shall contain the results of sampling and analysis of the discharge, done in accordance with the procedures approved by the POTW.

C. Reports, such as those identified in subsections A and B of this section but not limited to, shall be signed and certified by an authorized representative of the discharging facility.

D. All industrial users shall be required to retain for a minimum of three years any records and/or reports of monitoring activities or results and shall make such records/reports available for inspection and copying by the POTW. This period of retention shall be extended during the course of any unresolved pending litigation regarding the industrial user.

E. Notification of the Discharge of Hazardous Waste.

1. Any user who commences the discharge of hazardous waste shall notify the POTW, the EPA Regional Waste Management Division Director, and state hazardous waste authorities, in writing, of any discharge into the POTW of a substance which, if otherwise disposed of, would be a hazardous waste under 40 CFR Part 261. Such notification must include the name of the hazardous waste as set forth in 40 CFR Part 261, the EPA hazardous waste number, and the type of discharge (continuous, batch, or other). If the user discharges more than one hundred kilograms of such waste per calendar month to the POTW, the notification also shall contain the following information to the extent such information is known and readily available to the user:
an identification of the hazardous constituents contained in the wastes, an estimation of the mass and concentration of such constituents in the wastestream discharged during that calendar month, and an estimation of the mass of constituents in the wastestream expected to be discharged during the following twelve months. All notifications must take place no later than one hundred eighty days after the discharge commences. Any notification under this subsection need be submitted only once for each hazardous waste discharged. However, notifications of changed conditions must be submitted under this article. The notification requirement in this section does not apply to pollutants already reported by users subject to categorical pretreatment standards under the self monitoring requirements of this article.

2. Dischargers are exempt from the requirements of subsection A of this section during a calendar month in which they discharge no more than fifteen kilograms of hazardous wastes, unless the wastes are acute hazardous wastes as specified in 40

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 95
O ______
CFR 261.30(d) and 261.33(e). Discharge of more than fifteen kilograms of nonacute hazardous wastes in a calendar month, or of any quantity of acute hazardous wastes as specified in 40 CFR 261.30(d) and 261.33(e), requires a one- time notification.

Subsequent months during which the user discharges more than such quantities of any hazardous waste do not require additional notification.

3. In the case of any new regulations under Section 3001 of RCRA identifying additional characteristics of hazardous waste or listing any additional substance as a hazardous waste, the user must notify the director, the EPA Regional Waste Management Waste Division Director, and state hazardous waste authorities of the discharge of such substance within ninety days of the effective date of such regulations.

4. In the case of any notification made under this section, the user shall certify that it has a program in place to reduce the volume and toxicity of hazardous wastes generated to the degree it has determined to be economically practical by the director.

5. This provision does not create a right to discharge any substance not otherwise permitted to be discharged by this chapter, a permit issued thereunder, or any applicable federal or state law. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.170 Baseline monitoring reports.

A. Within either one hundred eighty days after the effective date of a categorical pretreatment standard, or the final administrative decision on a category determination under 40 CFR 403.6(a)(4), whichever is later, existing categorical industrial users currently discharging to, or scheduled to discharge to, the POTW shall submit to the director a report containing the information listed in subsection C of this section.

B. At least ninety days prior to commencement of their discharge, new sources, and sources that become categorical industrial users subsequent to the promulgation of an applicable categorical standard, shall submit to the director a report containing the information listed in subsection C of this section. A new source shall report the method of pretreatment it intends to use to meet applicable categorical standards. A new source shall also give estimates of its anticipated flow and quantity of pollutants to be discharged.

C. IUs described above shall submit the information set forth below:

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 96
O ______

1. Identifying Information. The IU shall submit the name and address of the facility including the name of the operator and owners.

2. Permits. The IU shall submit a list of any environmental control permits held by or for the facility.

3. Description of Operations. The IU shall submit a brief description of the nature, average rate of production, and standard industrial classification of the operation(s) carried out by such IU. This description shall include a schematic process diagram that indicates points of discharge to the POTW from the regulated processes.

4. Flow Measurement. The IU shall submit information showing the measured average daily and maximum daily flow, in gallons per day, to the POTW from each of the following:
a. Regulated process streams; and
b. Other streams as necessary to allow use of the combined waste stream formula of 40 CFR 403.6(e). The city may allow for verifiable estimates of these flows where justified by cost or feasibility considerations.

5. Measurement of Pollutants.
a. The IU shall identify the pretreatment standards applicable to each regulated process; and
b. The IU shall submit the results of sampling and analysis identifying the nature and concentration of regulated pollutants in the discharge from each regulated process. Both daily maximum and average concentration shall be reported. The sample shall be representative of daily operations.
c. A minimum of four grab samples must be used for pH, cyanide, total phenols, oil and grease, sulfide, and volatile organics. For all other pollutants, twenty-fourhour composite samples must be obtained through flow-proportional composite sampling techniques where feasible. The city may waive flow-proportional composite sampling for any IU that demonstrates that flow-proportional sampling is infeasible. In such cases, samples may be obtained through time-proportional composite sampling techniques or through a minimum of four grab samples

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 97
O ______
where the IU demonstrates that this will provide a representative sample of the effluent being discharged.
d. The IU shall take a minimum of one representative sample to compile the data necessary to comply with the requirements of this section. e. Samples should be taken immediately downstream from pretreatment facilities if such exist or immediately downstream from the regulated process if no pretreatment facility exists. If other wastewaters are mixed with the regulated wastewater prior to pretreatment, the IU shall measure the flows and concentrations necessary to allow use of the combined waste stream formula of 40 CFR 403.6(e) in order to evaluate compliance with the pretreatment standards.

Where an alternate concentration has been calculated in accordance with 40 CFR 403.6(e) this adjusted limit along with supporting data shall be submitted to the city.
f. Sampling and analysis shall be performed in accordance with the techniques prescribed in 40 CFR Part 136 and amendments thereto. Where 40 CFR Part 136 does not contain sampling or analytical techniques for the pollutant in question, or where the director determines that the 40 CFR Part 136 sampling and analytical techniques are inappropriate for the pollutant in question, sampling and analyses shall be performed by using validated analytical methods or any other applicable sampling and analytical procedures, including procedures suggested by the city or other parties, and approved by the director. g. The city may allow the submission of a baseline report that utilizes only historical data so long as the data provides information sufficient to determine the need for industrial pretreatment measures.
h. The baseline report shall indicate the time, date, and place of sampling, and methods of analysis, and shall certify that such sampling and analysis is representative of normal work cycles and expected pollutant discharges to the POTW.

6. Compliance Certification. The IU shall submit a statement, reviewed by an authorized representative of the IU (as defined in Section 13.08.160 and certified to by a qualified professional) indicating whether pretreatment standards are being met on a consistent basis, and, if not, whether additional operation and maintenance (O

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 98
O ______
and M) and/or additional pretreatment is required for the IU to meet the pretreatment standards and requirements.

7. Compliance Schedule. If additional pretreatment and/or O and M will be required to meet the pretreatment standards, the IU shall submit the shortest schedule by which the IU will provide such additional pretreatment and/or O and M. The completion date in this schedule shall not be later than the compliance date established for the applicable pretreatment standard. A compliance schedule shall meet the requirements set forth in Section 13.08.180.

8. All baseline monitoring reports must be certified in accordance with this section and be signed by an authorized representative as defined in Section 13.08.160of the discharging facility. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.180 Compliance schedule.

A. The schedule shall contain progress increments in the form of dates for the commencement and completion of major events leading to the construction and operation of additional pretreatment required for the IU to meet the applicable pretreatment standards (such events include, but are not limited to, hiring an engineer, completing preliminary and final plans, executing contracts for major components, commencing and completing construction, and beginning and conducting routine operation). No increment of the schedule shall exceed nine months;
B. No increment referred to above shall exceed nine months; C. The IU shall submit a progress report to the director no later than fourteen days following each date in the schedule and the final date of compliance, including in such progress report, at a minimum, whether it complied with the increment of progress, the reason for any delay, and if appropriate, the steps taken by the IU to return to the established schedule. In no event shall more than nine months elapse between submissions of such progress reports to the Director. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014) ; and D. In no event shall more than nine months elapse between submissions of such progress reports to the director. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 99
O ______

13.08.200 Periodic compliance reports.

A. All SIUs must, at a frequency determined by the director, submit no less than twice per year, in June and December or on other dates specified, reports indicating the nature and concentration of pollutants in the discharge that are limited by pretreatment standards, and the measured or estimated average and maximum daily flows for the reporting period. In cases where the pretreatment standard requires compliance with a best management practice or pollution prevention alternative, the SIU must submit documentation required by the director or the pretreatment standard necessary to determine the compliance status of the SIU. The director may modify the months during which the above reports are to be submitted.

B. All periodic compliance reports must be signed and certified by an authorized representative of the discharging facility. in accordance with Section 13.08.160. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.340 Computation of fee.

The sum of the fee described in Section 13.08.330 shall be the equivalent of the cost to similar properties then within the city which have paid for the facilities so to be used. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.350 Exemption of outstanding bonds from fee determination.

The sum of the fee described in Section 13.08.330 shall not include any amounts from which bonds of the city are then outstanding and to which the property shall become subject upon annexation. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.360 Main extensions to customers other than subdivisions—Terms and conditions.

A. Sewer mains may be extended by developers or other interested parties that would benefit by their extension, at their cost, providing provided the improvements are designed to current city standards and policy and are approved by the director of public works and director of utilities.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 100
O ______
B. The owner or developer who installs improvements which abut property other than that being developed, or in a greater size or capacity than that required for the development of the property under consideration, may be eligible for reimbursementd as provided in Section 16.20.110. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.390 Drainage below curb and below main sewer level.

A. Drainage Piping Serving Fixtures. Drainage piping serving fixtures, the flood level rims of which are located below the elevation of the curb or property line, at the point where the building sewer crosses under the curb or property line, and above the crown level of the main sewer, shall drain by gravity into the main sewer, and shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved typea backwater valve that is compliant with the CPC, and each such backwater valve shall be installed only in that branch or section of the drainage system which receives the discharge from fixtures located below the elevation of the curb or property line. If the drainage piping is lower than the next upstream manhole, the property owner must install a backwater valve. It is the property owner’s responsibility to determine whether a backwater valve is required.

B. Director Empowered to Stop Overflow. The City is not liable for damage caused by or resulting from a property owner’s failure to install and maintain a CPC-compliant backwater valve. If the property owner fails to install and maintain a backwater trap or backwater valve in good working condition,to be free of obstruction and function as designed, when required under this section, the director may order and require the plumbing fixture to be disconnected and removed and the outlet plugged or capped. In the event that the property owner fails to disconnect and plug or cap the sewer connection within ten days after written notice by the director, then the director shall arrange for such disconnection and capping, the cost of which may be collected by court action or may be declared to be a lien by action of the council after public hearing and notice of the property owner and shall be added to and collected as part of the tax roll.

C. Alternate Right to Terminate Water Service. Failure to comply with this section shall be considered an unauthorized action by the property owner. As an alternate to the procedure set forth in subsection B of this section, if the property owner fails to install and maintain a backwater trap valve in good working condition when requested under this chapter, the director may order and require termination of water service to the parcel and all structures connected to the sewer outlet subject to overflow. The water service shall

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 101
O ______
not be reinstated until the maintenance or installation of the backwater trap or backwater valve has been approved by the director.

D. Maintenance of House Sewer Connections. Maintenance of house sewer connections shall comply with subsSection 13.08.395(B). (Ord. 1704 § 15, 2021; Ord. 1665 § 2, 2019; Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.395 Private sewer laterals/systems.

A. Purpose. Inflow and infiltration (I/I) is a serious problem for the city in that during wet weather events, a significant amount of water is introduced into the city’s wastewater collection system from breaches in the public and private sewer pipeline system. Studies have shown that private sewer laterals are a significant source of I/I for the city. The city has determined that it is in the interest of the public’s health, safety, and welfare to address I/I contributed by private sewer laterals and, as such, it is a city priority to require the inspection of private sewer laterals.

B. Ownership, Maintenance, and Repair.

1. The entire lateral, from the building connection up to and including the “wye” connection or other tie-in to the city-owned sewer main, shall fall within the owner’s responsibility for installation, maintenance, repair, and replacement.

2. Each property owner shall be responsible for maintenance and repair of their private sewer lateral in compliance with this section in a safe and sanitary condition, including:
a. Private sewer laterals shall be free of displaced joints, breaks, offsets, structural defects, damage, open joints, missing portions of pipe, root intrusion, cracks, leaks, sediment deposits, bellies in the pipe or any other similar conditions, defects or obstructions likely to cause or contribute to blockage of the private sewer lateral or the public sewer.
b. Private sewer laterals shall be equipped with cleanouts. c. Private sewer laterals shall not be constructed, either in whole or in part, of “Orangeburg pipe.”

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 102
O ______
d. As described in Section 13.08.030(A), it is unlawful for any individual to connect the following to a private sewer lateral: storm drains, roof drains, yard drains, surface or subsurface drainage, groundwater, or other non-sewage pipes or drains.

3. If a property owner fails to maintain the abovementioned wastewater facilities in a safe and sanitary condition, the director may order and require termination of water service to the parcel and all structures connected to the sewer outlet subject to these conditions. The water service shall not be reinstated until the maintenance or installation of appropriate wastewater disposal facilities has been approved by the director.

4. Before granting any permit authorizing construction of a private sewer lateral or private sewer main serving multiple properties, the city shall require a private easement setting forth responsibilities for each parcel served (including responsibility for maintenance, inspection, and improvement of the shared sewer lateral).

C. Inspection of Existing Private Sewer Laterals.

1. Except as set forth in subsection (C)(2) of this section, after January 1, 2020, all private sewer laterals connected to the city’s sewer system shall be inspected per subsection F of this section at the property owner’s sole expense, when any of the following events occur:
a. Whenever the city has issued a notice of violation following a sanitary sewer overflow event from a property’s private sewer lateral. b. Upon submittal of a building permit for the addition of a bedroom, bathroom, or kitchen in a residential structure or the addition of nonresidential space or an additional plumbing fixture unit in nonresidential structures. c. A change of the use of the structure from: (i) residential to nonresidential use; (ii) to a nonresidential use that will result in a higher flow than the previous nonresidential use; or (iii) to a nonresidential use where the structure served has been vacant or unoccupied for more than three years.
d. Increase in size of the domestic water meter serving the property or adding a new domestic water meter.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 103
O ______
e. Whenever property located in the city and containing one or more structures which are served by a private sewer lateral or laterals is subdivided. The inspection shall occur prior to recordation of the final map. f. Within thirty days of notification by the city that “smoke testing” or closed-circuit television (CCTV) sewer main inspection indicates the presence of inflow or infiltration from private property that impacts the operation of the public wastewater collection system.
g. Upon any change in ownership of real property within the city, which shall be implemented as follows:
i. “Change in ownership” shall have the meaning set forth in Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 60 and 61. A change in ownership shall not include those transactions as set forth in Revenue and Taxation Code Section 62. ii. Before close of escrow for any change in ownership of real property within the city, the seller(s) of such property shall disclose to the buyer(s) the results of the private sewer lateral inspection as set forth in subsection F of this section.
h. For events identified in subsections (C)(1)(a) through (C)(1)(f) of this section, repair or replacement shall be made pursuant to subsection G of this section.

2. Exceptions. An inspection required pursuant to subsection (C)(1) of this section shall not be required in the following circumstances:
a. New Construction or Prior Replacement of Lateral. If the owner(s) (or the owner’s predecessor-in-interest) has originally installed or has replaced the private sewer lateral within the twenty years prior to the date the inspection would otherwise be required.
b. Prior Inspection of a Lateral. If the owner(s) (or the owner’s predecessor-ininterest) has completed an inspection of the sewer lateral in accordance with the inspection requirements of subsection F of this section within the past five years. c. The private sewer lateral is located within a common interest development system that is not owned and operated by the city, which is regulated under

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 104
O ______
subsection D of this section and serves more than two separate units or properties within the common interest development.

The owner shall bear the burden of proving that the inspection requirements of subsection (C)(1) of this section do not apply. The owner shall provide proof of any prior replacement, inspection or repair of a private sewer lateral in the form of a validly issued permit or other documentation that ensures such prior replacement, repair or inspection of a private sewer lateral occurred pursuant to the exceptions above. The form and content of the document or proof must be deemed sufficient by the city’s utilities director.

D. Private Sewer Laterals within Common Interest Developments.

1. For purposes of this section, the term “common interest development” shall include any community apartment project, condominium project, planned development, or stock cooperative.

2. Private sewer laterals located within a common interest development shall be inspected pursuant to the requirements of subsection F of this section as follows:
a. By January 1, 2030, and once every twenty years thereafter. ba. Whenever the city has issued a notice of violation following a sanitary sewer overflow event from a common interest development’s private sewer lateral. cb. Increase in size of the water meter serving the common interest development.

3. Exceptions. An inspection required pursuant to subsection (D)(1) of this section shall not be required in the following circumstances:
a. Prior Replacement of Lateral. If the private sewer lateral serving the common interest development in its entirety was installed or replaced within the twenty years prior to the date the inspection would otherwise be required. b. Prior Inspection or Repair of a Lateral. If the private sewer lateral serving the common interest development in its entirety was inspected in accordance with the inspection requirements of subsection F of this section within the five years prior to the date the inspection would otherwise be required.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 105
O ______
E. Inspection of Shared Private Sewer Laterals. Each property owner served by a shared private sewer lateral shall be responsible for compliance with subsection B of this section and shall be subject to the inspection requirements identified in subsection C of this section. For purposes of this subsection E, a “shared private sewer lateral” shall mean laterals serving more than one property that are not part of a common interest development.

F. Inspection Requirements.

1. Property owners must submit documentation of the sewer lateral inspection to the city prior to the close of escrow. Testing may be accomplished by either a water exfiltration test, an air test, or closed-circuit video recording observation. Installation of cleanouts and removal of existing P-traps may be necessary to accomplish the video inspection. If a closed-circuit video recording observation is selected as the method of inspection, then the video shall meet the following requirements:
a. Shall be in digital format.
b. Shall be in color (black and white or otherwise unclear video will not be accepted).
c. Shall show the address of the lateral.
d. Shall show the date the video was taken.
e. Shall inspect the entire lateral from the house connection to the city-owned sewer main.
f. Shall have a running foot or time marker clearly visible on the screen. g. Where joints are present, shall briefly stop the camera at each to clearly indicate their integrity.
h. Shall have the telephone number for the point of contact for the company providing the inspection.
i. A map shall be provided with the video inspection to clearly show the lateral location including the cleanout or access point at the house connection used to insert the camera into the lateral and the wye connection to the city-owned sewer main.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 106
O ______

2. The lateral inspection and lateral inspection report shall be prepared and signed by a contractor, plumber, or a person experienced in lateral inspections who shall declare that the report is true and correct. At a minimum, the inspection report shall include the information in Exhibit A:

EXHIBIT A: PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL INSPECTION REPORT
Property Address (or
Addresses):___________________________________________________________ _______
Inspection
Date:_______________________________
Inspection
Method:_________________________
_____
Company Name/Point of
Contact:______________________________________________________________ ____
Phone Number/Email
Address:______________________________________________________________ ______
Lateral Length (in
feet):_________________________
Lateral
Material:________________________
________
Installation date (if
known):______________________
Lateral
Age:___________________________
________
Describe deficiencies (if
any):_________________________________________________________________ ___

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 107
O ______
EXHIBIT A: PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL INSPECTION REPORT
Plumber/Contractor
Signature:_____________________________________________________________ License # of
Plumber/Contractor:_____________________________________________________ Property Owner Signature:__(Digital ID or wet)
________________________________________________________________ Property Owner interest in participating in city Wastewater Flow Offset Program: *
YES NO
* If Property Owner indicates “Yes”, city would include address on an eligibility list for Wastewater Flow Offset Mitigation requirement.

3. A contractor, plumber, or a person experienced in lateral inspections who prepares a false lateral inspection report shall be subject to punishment under Article XII of this chapter in addition to any other legal remedies or punishment provided by law.

4. Verification. The city reserves the right to verify the sewer lateral inspection results prior to being accepted.

G. Sewer Lateral Repair or Replacement Requirements. Upon receipt of the private sewer lateral inspection report pursuant to this chapter, within seven business days, the city shall review the private sewer lateral inspection and lateral inspection report to verify the plumber/contractor findings and provide the owner with a determination on whether the lateral meets the criteria described in subsection B of this section. If the private sewer lateral is not in compliance with subsection B of this section, then it shall be repaired or replaced to conform to such standards within 180 days. If an inspection of a noncompliant lateral was conditioned due to a sanitary sewer overflow or from findings of infiltration and intrusion, or a lateral with defects having not met the required pipe material requirements, it must be completely replaced rather than repaired. No person shall repair or replace a sewer lateral without first obtaining a permit from the city.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 108
O ______
H. Punishment for Violation of this Chapter. Failure to comply with the requirements of this article shall be punishable pursuant to the remedies identified in Article XII of this chapter. No building permits or other discretionary approvals shall be issued for a property with a private sewer lateral that is determined to be not in compliance with subsection B of this section until the private sewer lateral is brought into compliance with city standards.

Violations of this article shall be punishable pursuant to the remedies identified in Article XII of this chapter. It is considered a violation for any property owner to have a sewer lateral system that does not comply with subsection B, unless the repair or replacement of such system is being pursued in good faith. The city may withhold building permits or other discretionary approvals for a property with a private sewer lateral that is determined to be not in compliance with subsection B of this section until the private sewer lateral is brought into compliance with city standards. Final building approval will be conditioned upon repair or replacement of any noncompliant lateral systems to the satisfaction of the director.

I. Rebate Programs. The city may establish by resolution one or more programs to assist owners with the replacement of private sewer laterals.

J. Fees. The city council may from time to time establish, by resolution, fees for issuing permits, reviewing inspection reports and other activities of the city performed pursuant to this chapter. (Ord. 1704 §§ 16—18, 2021; Ord. 1665 § 3 (part), 2019)

13.08.396 Wastewater flow offset.

A. Purpose. The city experiences surcharging in the wastewater collection system and sanitary sewer overflows during wet weather events due to inflow and infiltration. The purpose of these regulations is to establish a methodology whereby new or intensified development in capacity constrained areas as established by the city council could offset new wastewater flow to mitigate capacity constraints in the existing wastewater collection system to accommodate the project’s additional demand. Without a reduction in inflow and infiltration in these areas, the city will not be able to serve new or intensified development until a significant number of private sewer laterals are replaced or public sewer mains are upsized. Wastewater flow offset through private lateral replacement provides a benefit to the wastewater collection system and the community by reducing public and environmental health concerns by reducing potential SSOs.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 109
O ______
B. Application. The provisions of this article shall apply to new or intensified development in capacity constrained areas of the wastewater collection system as established by the city council.

C. Calculating the Wastewater Flow Offset. An applicant shall calculate a development’s wastewater flow offset (Exhibit B) using the domestic sewage generation factors and peaking factor identified in the uniform design criteria, found in the city’s adopted engineering standards.

D. Wastewater Flow Offset through Private Lateral Replacement. The city determined that replacement of a private sewer lateral serving an existing single-family residence (one equivalent dwelling unit) would create a wastewater flow offset of three hundred ninety gallons per day. This is equal to the wastewater generation rate of aone singlefamily residence (one hundred fifty gpdgallons per day), at a peaking factor of 2.6.

EXHIBIT B: Wastewater Flow Offset Calculation Worksheet Residential
Development:

Studio Units: ____________________________
Multi-Family Units: ____________________________
Single-Family Units: ____________________________
Residential Wastewater
Flow:

Studio Units: ____________________________
Multi-Family Units: ____________________________
Single-Family Units: ____________________________

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 110
O ______
EXHIBIT B: Wastewater Flow Offset Calculation Worksheet RESIDENTIAL FLOW TOTAL (gallons
per day):
____________________________
Non-Residential
Development:

Commercial Square
Footage:
____________________________
Industrial Square
Footage:
____________________________
Manufacturing Square
Footage:
____________________________
Business Park Square
Footage:
____________________________
Hotel/Motel Rooms: ____________________________
Non-Residential
Wastewater Flow:

Commercial: ____________________________
Industrial: ____________________________
Manufacturing: ____________________________
Business Park: ____________________________
Hotel/Motel: ____________________________

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 111
O ______
EXHIBIT B: Wastewater Flow Offset Calculation Worksheet

NON-RESIDENTIAL FLOW TOTAL
(gallons per day):
____________________________
(Proposed Residential Flow + Proposed Non-Residential Flow) x Peaking Factor = Total Wastewater Flow Offset

TOTAL WASTEWATER FLOW OFFSET
(gallons per day):
____________________________
* Replacement of a private sewer lateral serving an existing single-family residence (one equivalent dwelling unit) would offset 390 gallons per day of additional wastewater flow).

E. Wastewater flow offset must occur off-site, within the same capacity constrained wastewater flow basin as the proposed new or intensified development. Developers required to complete an offset must complete a Wastewater Flow Offset Program Application to obtain a building permit for the offset. Underlying building permits for the project triggering the offset may be withheld until completion of the wastewater offset.

F. Construction of off-site public sewer main improvements, including replacement or rehabilitation of sewer manholes, providing the equivalent or greater reduction in inflow and infiltration within the same capacity constrained wastewater flow basin may be allowed as an alternative to wastewater flow offsets (replacement of private sewer laterals) at the discretion of the utilities director. (Ord. 1704 § 19, 2021; Ord. 1665 § 3 (part), 2019)
G. Single family residences applying for an ADU building permit may be allowed to submit for an offset in a different capacity constrained basin, provided there is an equivalent or greater reduction in inflow and infiltration, at the discretion of the utilities director.

H. Sewer capacity offsets within the same parcel boundary (on-site) may be considered as an offset credit for a residential intensification project, at the discretion of the utilities director.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 112
O ______

13.08.400 Determination—User classification.

A. A schedule of charges and fees shall be adopted by the city by resolution and may be amended from time to time which will enable the city to comply with the revenue requirements of the State Clean Water Grant Program. Charges and fees shall be determined in a manner consistent with regulations of the grant program.

B. All users shall be classified by assigning each one to a user classification (significant industrial user, Class I user or Class II user) categoryas either a significant industrial user, Class I user, or a Class II user, according to the principal activity conducted on the user’s premises and appropriate nonindustrial classifications as determined by the city. The purpose of such classification is to facilitate the regulation of wastewater discharges based on wastewater constituents and characteristics to provide an effective means of source control, and to establish a system of user charges and industrial user wastewater discharge permit fees which will ensure an equitable recovery of the city’s cost for operation of the pretreatment program.

C. The charges for each wastewater constituent and characteristic shall be established by the city and set forth in the city’s schedule of charges and fees, which may include, but shall not be limited to:

1. User classification charges.

2. Fees for monitoring and inspections.

3. Charges and fees based on wastewater constituents and characteristics to include industrial cost recovery provisions of the Federal Act (i.e., PL 92-500).

4. In case a residence or place of business becomes vacant, the minimum sewer charge shall be collected until the city is requested to shut off the water.

5. All charges for such sewage service shall be paid at the same time as water charges are paid to the city and shall be billed upon the same water bill sent to the user; and both amounts must be paid or the city may, in addition to other remedies, shut off the water service.

6. Any person failing to pay the sewer service charge when due, and if the water service has been disconnected, shall pay the water restoration-reconnection charge provided for in Section 13.04.060.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 113
O ______
D. When user classification charges are established, they shall be based upon a minimum basic charge for each premises, computed on the basis of wastewater from a domestic premises. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.460 Unlawful discharges.

A. Notification of Discharge.

1. Users shall notify the director immediately upon discharging wastes in violation of this chapter to enable countermeasures to be taken by the city to minimize damage to the community sewer, treatment facility, treatment process, treatment personnel and the receiving waters.

2. This notification shall be followed within fifteen days of the date of occurrence, by a detailed written statement describing the causes of the accidental discharge and the measures being taken to prevent future occurrence.

3. Such notification will not relieve users of liability for any expense, loss or damage to the sewer system, treatment plant, or treatment process, or other public or private property, or for any fines imposed on the city by any public entity on account thereof.

B. Notices to Employees. In order that employees of users be informed of city requirements, users shall make available to their employees copies of this chapter, together with such other wastewater information and notices which may be furnished by the city from time to time directed toward more effective water pollution control. A notice shall be furnished and permanently posted on at the user’s bulletin boardpremises advising employees whom to call contact in case of an accidental discharge in violation of this chapter.

C. Preventive Measures. Any direct or indirect connection or entry point for persistent or deleterious wastes to the user’s plumbing or drainage system should be eliminated.

Where such action is impractical or unreasonable, the user shall appropriately label such entry points to warn against discharge of such wastes in violation of this chapter. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 114
O ______

13.08.480 Appeals.

A. Within five days of issuance of a notice to correct/notice of violation of this chapter, a person receiving such notice(s) and citation may request in writing that the director review a contested notice to correct and/or notice of violation. Director review will proceed under the terms of Section 1.24.090. There is no separate right to appeal from the director’s review or determination on a notice of correction or violation, but any assertions of error or challenges to the director’s review or determination may be raised as part of any appeal from an administrative citation pursuant to Section 1.24.100.

BA. Any user, permit applicant, or permit holder affected by any decision, action or determination, including cease and desist orders, made by the director in issuing an administrative citation, interpreting or implementing the provisions of this chapter or in any permit issued herein, may file with the city clerk a written appeal within ten days of such decision, action or determination, setting forth in detail the facts supporting the appeal, in accordance with Section 1.24.100. The appeal shall include a statement whether the appellant elects either to proceed with a hearing officer (if no writ will be sought) or to the administrative review board (if the appellant intends to challenge city action by writ), pursuant to Section 1.24.100(B)(2). The request for appeal shall be deemed filed on the date received by the city clerk. If no appeal is filed within ten days of the effective date of the administrative citation, the administrative citation shall be deemed final.

BC. The written appeal shall be heard by the council within thirty days from the date of filing. The council shall make a final ruling on the appeal within ten days of the close of the meeting. Pending final determination on the appeal by the council, the decision appealed from shall remain in full force and effect. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014) The appeal will be heard either by a hearing officer or the administrative review board, by appellant’s election, by the procedure set forth in Sections 1.24.110-1.24.130.

D. The notice of the decision by either the hearing officer or administrative review board or construction board of appeals is final and is not subject to appeal to the City Council.

The appellant may seek judicial review pursuant to Section 1.24.140.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 115
O ______

13.08.510 Assessment of cost.

Any person who discharges or causes to be discharged any water or wastewater in violation of this chapter and such discharge, either singly or by interaction with other discharges, results in damage to or is otherwise detrimental to or adversely affects the POTW, city property, city storm drain system or waters of the state shall be liable to the city for expenses necessary to correct that damage, detriment or adverse effect. The expenses may include, but are not limited to, costs for labor, material, inspection and overhead. Any expenses resulting from the investigation of unlawful discharges shall be collected from the responsible party. In addition, any monetary penalties imposed against the city shall also be costs for which the violator is liable to the city. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014)

13.08.550 Prohibited discharge standards.

A user shall have an affirmative defense to an enforcement action brought against it for noncompliance with the general prohibitions in subSsection 13.08.040(A) or the specific prohibitions in subsSections 13.08.040(B) through (J) if it can prove that it did not know, or have reason to know, that its discharge, alone or in conjunction with discharges from other sources, would cause pass through or interference and that either:

A. A local limit exists for each pollutant discharged and the user was in compliance with each limit directly prior to, and during, the pass through or interference; or B. No local limit exists, but the discharge did not change substantially in nature or constituents from the user’s prior discharge when the city was regularly in compliance with its NPDES permit, and in the case of interference, was in compliance with applicable sludge use or disposal requirements. (Ord. 1598 § 1 (part), 2014) SECTION 9. Chapter 13.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 116
O ______
Chapter 13.24 - RECYCLED WATER SERVICE

13.24.020 Use and distribution of recycled water.

A. The use and distribution of recycled water shall be in accordance with the city’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use and all applicable federal, state and local laws, permits and regulations, including Titles 17 and 22 of the California Code of Regulations, as may be amended from time to time. (Ord. 1526 § 1, 2009) B. Recycled water use for construction purposes shall follow the current Construction Water Permit Program, as may be amended from time to time. Failure to comply with program requirements will result in administrative action.

C. Each recycled water site shall have one designated Site Supervisor unless approved by the utilities Director. Site supervisors are required to undergo certification per the City’s Recycled Water Procedures for Use.

D. A parcel owner utilizing recycled water must maintain adequate site signage and utilize appropriate materials designating recycled water use (purple pipe).

Appropriate signage and material use may be determined by the Utilities Director or Recycled Water Specialist.

E. A parcel not receiving recycled water shall not utilize piping, drip tubing, or other materials commonly associated with recycled water (purple pipe). Sites utilizing potable water and materials designed for use with recycled water may be required to replace the material at the property owner’s expense.

F. Noncompliance with Recycled Water Use and Procedures or any requirements may result in administrative action and temporary suspension of water service.

G. Before receiving recycled water, a parcel owner must enter into and adhere to a Recycled water user agreement with the Utilities Department.

SECTION 10. Section 15.02.050 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

15.02.050 Plumbing standards.

The city of San Luis Obispo hereby adopts the 2022 California Plumbing Code as Part 5 of the San Luis Obispo Building Construction and Fire Prevention Code, 2023. Except as

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 117
O ______
otherwise provided herein, or as later amended in Section 15.04.050, or affected by San Luis Obispo’s Public Services Code Section 13.08, Part 5 of the San Luis Obispo Building Construction and Fire Prevention Code, 2023, shall be as published in the California Plumbing Code, 2022 Edition, and as copyrighted in 2021 by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials and the California Building Standards Commission, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 5, including all of its tables, indices, addenda, footnotes, and the following appendices:

A. Appendix A—Recommended Rules for Sizing the Water Supply System.

B. Appendix B—Explanatory Notes on Combination Waste and Vent Systems.

C. Appendix C—Alternate Plumbing Systems.

D. Appendix D—Sizing Storm Water Drainage Systems.

E. Appendix E—Manufactured/Mobile Home Parks and Recreational Vehicle Parks.

F. Appendix G—Sizing of Venting Systems.

G. Appendix H—Private Sewage Disposal Systems.

H. Appendix I—Installation Standards.

I. Appendix J—Combination of Indoor and Outdoor Combustion and Ventilation Opening Design.

J. Appendix K—Potable Rainwater Catchment Systems.

K. Appendix M—Peak Water Demand Calculator.

L. Appendix N—Impact of Water Temperature on The Potential for Scalding and Legionella Growth.

Said California Plumbing Code is hereby referred to and by such reference is incorporated herein as if fully set forth. (Ord. 1723 § 5, 2022)
SECTION 11. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The New Times, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 118
O ______
INTRODUCED on the ____ day of ____, 2024, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ____ day of ____, 2024, on the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
_______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
City of San Luis Obispo
Council Agenda Correspondence
DATE: April 2, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Timothea Tway, Director of Community Development
Prepared By: Rachel Cohen, Senior Planner, Community Development VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: ITEM 6L – AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

FOR THE MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
ITEM 7B – INITITATION OF GENERAL PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN

AMENDMENTS TO CHANGE BUSINESS PARK ZONING TO SERVICE

COMMERCIAL ZONING AND ALLOW MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT
365 PRADO ROAD LOCATED WITHIN THE MAGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
Staff received the following questions regarding the proposed initiation of amendments to the General Plan and the Margarita Area Specific Plan for a mixed-use development located at 365 Prado. The questions are below with staff’s response shown in italics:
1) If Council authorizes Item #6l (MASP Update), what will be the impact on Item #7b (365 Prado)?
Item 6l would authorize staff to move forward with updating the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) as planned in the City’s Housing and Homelessness Major City Goal (MCG) in the 2023-25 work plan. The update to the MASP would evaluate increasing density on existing residentially zoned land and consider rezoning the Business Park zone to Service Commercial in order to allow mixeduse development. This update would also include consideration of rezoning 365 Prado from Business Park to Service Commercial, as it is part of the MASP. This is the same zoning that is being requested by the applicant for 365 Prado in its currently proposed application. As currently envisioned, the MASP update would rezone the 365 Prado site to the same zone as being requested by the developer, however, it is possible that through the MASP update process it is determined that the rezoning from Business Park to Service Commercial is not the best path forward for the MASP, which could impact the property at 365 Prado. Ultimately, the MASP and the land use and development plan for the 365 Prado property must be consistent with one another.

2) In the staff report for Item #7b (365 Prado), it states: “The applicant, through this initiation, is requesting to move forward on the rezoning of 365 Prado Road independent of the City’s update of the MASP.” Later in the report, it also states: “It should be noted that if both efforts move forward, they will include support from consultants to assist staff with processing of the projects, however, concurrent processing will take time and resources away from each other.”
a. Since the two items are complimentary, can you further explain the time/resources statements above?
The two items address similar issues (rezoning land to allow housing) in the same geographic area but would be two separate projects running parallel with each other. The MASP Update will look at the entire Area Plan and conduct analysis based on all the land uses, improvements, resource needs, and fiscal impacts to the City, etc. related to a land use change of this magnitude. The 365 Prado project will focus on one parcel’s land use and the needed improvements, resource needs, etc. for that one parcel.

Each project will require a consultant to manage the project, independent environmental review, and City staff to oversee the project. It will take time and resources for staff to ensure that throughout the processing of the two projects the two work products are complementary and are not inconsistent with one another. As currently envisioned, the goal of both projects would be to rezone the MASP and 365 Prado to allow additional housing capacity in this area by rezoning land from Business Park to Service Commercial.

There is a risk that at some point, the two projects may not be consistent with one another. For example, it is possible that after completing some background work it is determined that there is a different rezoning strategy that is more appropriate for the MASP as a whole. This could require changes to the 365 Prado project. Working on the two projects at one time is possible, however, there is increased coordination needed to move both forward at the same time, and, at the end, the two projects cannot be inconsistent with one another.
b. What is the proposed completion date for the consultant to complete the scope of work defined in Item #6l (MASP Update)?
Staff estimates that the MASP Update (described in Item #6l) would be completed early 2026.
c. If Council initiates work on Item #7b (365 Prado Project) alone, or in addition to Item #6l (MASP Update), what would the timeframe be on next steps for 365 Prado?
If Council directs staff to move forward on item #7b (365 Prado project) alone, then staff would not move forward on a work item in the City’s work

plan that was identified to support the City’s MCG for Housing and Homelessness. This would mean that the City would not complete this work plan item at this time.

If Council directs staff to move forward on both item #7b (365 Prado project) and item #6l (MASP Update), then staff would move forward working on both of these items concurrently. Assuming both projects move forward with no anticipated or unexpected changes, staff anticipates that both projects would have roughly the same completion time of early 2026. Should there be changes to the scope of either project, this could impact the timeline to ensure consistency between the two projects. Should Council decide to initiate 365 Prado, the next steps would be for the applicant to submit an application with a detailed project description and plans. Once received, the City would bring on a consultant to work with staff to review the submittal for completeness and once complete, move forward on environmental review and processing the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, Rezoning, Major Development Review, and Subdivision Review for the proposed project.
3) On page 586 of the packet, the Covelop proposal uses the term “Type V construction.” Can you please explain what this means?
Type V construction is building code terminology for wood-framed construction. 4) Please explain the following underlined section below a little more (from packet page 572, second paragraph). How is it determined whether a 5% or 10% figure is used for the deed-restricted units?
However, the proposal does state that the project will include a density bonus. If the project requests a 20% density bonus, for example, it would be required to provide 5% of the base density as very low-income deed restricted units. Based on the project proposing 224 dwelling units, 212 units would be market rate and 12 units would be very low-income. If the 224-dwelling unit project provides 10% of the base density as low-income units to receive a 20% density bonus, 25 would be low-income deed restricted units and the remaining 199 units would be market rate.

State Density Bonus Law allows the applicant / developer to choose what level of Below Market Rate (BMR) income category they would like to build for their deedrestricted units. An applicant / developer can choose to build units for very low, low or moderate household incomes. Based on the total percentage of BMR units to market rate units, the project then receives additional density through a percentage density bonus. For example, dedicating 10% of a project to low-income units would provide an applicant / developer with a 20% density bonus (this is on top of the base density allowed for the site). The paragraph above provides real numbers of the total number to BMR units that the 365 Prado project would be required to

produce through a density bonus. Ultimately, however, the number of affordable units and affordability level is determined by the developer as part of their application. At this time, the development team has not indicated exactly what they would be proposing.
5) What is the policy justification for the applicant's getting preferential treatment, i.e. being processed earlier than the MASP update and proposing a new land use not contemplated by our MCG work plan for Housing and Homelessness?
The applicant, per MC Section 17.130.020, has the ability to request a change to the General Plan, but it is up to the Council to determine if the amendment is consistent with overall policy direction in the General Plan and if staff should move forward with processing the requested change.
6) Is there precedent for this kind of "spot zoning" just before the update of a specific plan?
Staff has clarified with the City Attorney’s office that the proposed request is not considered spot zoning. However, the 365 Prado Project is proposing new zoning that is not currently found in the MASP. The MASP Update includes review of all the parcels that are currently zoned Business Park and consideration of changing them to Service Commercial. Staff cannot recall a similar instance when a project on a parcel in a portion of a Specific Plan area was proposed at the same time as a Specific Plan update.
7) How would timing work in the following scenarios?
a. If processing the 365 Prado Project went forward at the same time as the MASP Update, how long would the 365 Prado Project be delayed? b. If processing the 365 Prado Project went forward at the same time as the MASP Update, how long would the MASP Update be delayed? c. If processing the 365 Prado Project went forward after the MASP Update, how long would the 365 Prado Project be delayed? d. If processing the 365 Prado Project went forward before the MASP update, how long would the MASP Update be delayed?
It is difficult to address each of these scenarios because it is currently unknown when the components of each of the projects (365 Prado and the MASP Update) will be complete. . As stated above, the 365 Prado Project and the MASP Update are two separate and different projects, however, they will ultimately need to be consistent with one another. If the MASP Update is completed before the 365 Prado Project moves forward, there would be no need for a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and rezoning for the 365 Prado Project, and the project would only require Major Development, Subdivision, and Environmental reviews.

8) Questions regarding costs:
a. How much would “General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, Rezoning, Major Development review, subdivision review and environmental review” cost? Who would pay—the developer or the City?
For the 365 Prado application, amendments to the General Plan and Specific Plan, Rezoning, Major Development review, subdivision review and environmental review would require City fees of $94,343.741 plus environmental review of 30% + Contract Cost. The applicant / developer would be required to pay these fees.
b. How would the costs of this development be impacted (decreased or increased) if it were included in the MASP update and processed after the update?
If the 365 Prado Project is processed after the MASP Update, staff would complete work on the Major Development Review and Subdivision. As with all development projects, a consultant would complete the Environmental Review with staff oversight. The project, if processed after the MASP update, would not require General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments or Rezoning and therefore the applicant would not be charged for those entitlements (savings of $41,955.82).
c. What if any impact fees would be required?
Not enough information has been provided at this time to determine what all the impacts fees may be, however, impact fees will be required from the development regardless of whether it is processed concurrently with, or after the MASP. It should be noted that if the 365 Prado Project moves forward before the MASP Update and the MASP Update determines new impact fees are needed for higher density development to address needed infrastructure or services, the 365 Prado Project would not be assessed this new fee because it moved forward before the MASP Update was adopted.

It is possible that a development agreement could address potential impact fee updates that would apply to the 365 Prado Project, however, the applicant has not applied for a development agreement at this time.

1 GP Map (includes rezoning) = $21,421.60
Specific Plan Amendment = $20,534.22
Subdivision 21+ lots (deposit $20,000) = $31,811.07
Environmental Review = 30% + Contract Cost
Major Development Projects = $20,576.85

9) Could the City require “all electric” units?
Currently, the City cannot require all electric housing units absent a Development Agreement.
10) What is staff's “preliminary analysis of the proposed amendment's consistency with the General Plan, the City's Major City Goals and the ALUP?”
Based on a preliminary analysis by staff, the proposed 365 Prado Project appears to be consistent with the General Plan, the City’s Major City Goals, and the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Detailed discussion is provided on Agenda Report pages 571 – 573. Additional analysis and consideration would be included as part of a full project analysis if the 365 Prado Project is to move forward. 11) What further details regarding affordable housing in this conceptual plan are needed to comport with RHNA requirements for affordable housing? The applicant of the 365 Prado Project has indicated that they would like to utilize a density bonus for this project. By doing so, they would have to provide a certain number of BMR units as required by the state (see response to question 4 above).

The 365 Prado property was not included in the 6th Cycle Housing Element Inventory and was not anticipated to support the City’s current RHNA. At this time, there is not enough information from the developer to determine the percentage or total number of affordable units/market rate units that will be included in the project. 12) Could the 65 for-rent units be designated affordable and managed by HASLO or People's self-help?
The applicant would only be required to provide the number of affordable units required as a part of the density bonus. However, City Council could provide direction to the applicant and staff regarding the number of affordable housing units they would like to see in the project.
13) Are there bike paths proposed?
Not enough information has been provided at this time regarding proposed bike paths. The project will be required to be consistent with the City’s Circulation Element.
14) Will there be charging stations for the multifamily complex? Not enough information has been provided at this time regarding parking. The project will be required to comply with the City’s parking requirements including Electric Vehicle (EV) Parking for Multi-Unit Residential with 5 or more units (see Municipal Code Section 17.72.040).

Item 7b
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4008
For Agenda of: 4/2/2024
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 45 minutes
FROM: Timmi Tway, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Rachel Cohen, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: INITIATION OF GENERAL PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS

TO CHANGE BUSINESS PARK ZONING TO SERVICE COMMERCIAL
ZONING AND ALLOW MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT 365 PRADO

ROAD LOCATED WITHIN THE MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLAN

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to staff on whether to proceed with processing the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments to change Business Park (BP) zoning to Service Commercial (C-S) zoning and allow mixed-use development at 365 Prado Road.

POLICY CONTEXT
Why is this coming to City Council?
Amendments to the General Plan require orderly processing consistent with the overall goals of the City’s planning program and requirements of California state law. A General Plan Amendment is any change to General Plan maps or text. State law provides that each mandatory General Plan element (Land Use Element, Housing Element, etc.) may be amended no more than four times per year. Municipal Code Section 17.130.020 specifies that the Council may initiate General Plan amendments at any time by directing staff to prepare the necessary analysis and scheduling the proposed amendment for consideration at a hearing. On November 15, 2023, the City received an application from the applicant, Covelop, for a project at 365 Prado Road that requires General Plan and Specific Plan amendments. Staff is seeking City Council direction to proceed with this application.

DISCUSSION
Background
The Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) was adopted in 2004 to support the General Plan’s goal for a compact urban form and to provide permanent open space and a mix of housing with supporting services and infrastructure. The MASP was envisioned on properties in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, and any

Item 7b
proposed development was subject to the 2002 Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). The ALUP identified safety subareas that limited residential and non-residential density based on potential aviation hazards. Certain portions of the MASP were within these safety subareas that prohibited or significantly limited residential and non-residential development and required a close look at land use and density considerations to assure that new development would be compatible with the 2002 ALUP.

In 2021 the County of San Luis Obispo amended the 2002 ALUP. The size and shape of the safety subareas around the airport changed and now several areas of the MASP are either available for residential development (where not allowed before) or available for higher density residential development (see Attachments A and B). 2023-25 Financial Plan Margarita Area Specific Plan Update As part of the City’s 2023-25 Financial Plan (Housing & Homelessness MCG Task 3.1.b), Council identified the task to initiate amendments and an update to the entire MASP that would increase density on existing residentially zoned land and consider allowing mixeduse development on commercially zoned land, where appropriate and consistent with the updated ALUP. Staff has moved forward with this MCG task and a Request for Proposals (RFP) has been included as a consent item as a part of this April 2, 2024 Council Agenda.

The RFP would allow the City to bring on a consultant to assist with the initiation and completion of the proposed amendments to the MASP. As proposed, a consultant would be selected in June 2024 to begin work on the update. The applicant, through this initiation, is requesting to move forward on the rezoning of 365 Prado Road independent of the City’s update of the MASP.

Project Description
The applicant, Covelop, has submitted a request to amend the MASP and the General Plan Land Use Map to change 365 Prado Road from Business Park (BP) zoning to Service Commercial (C-S) zoning and allow mixed-use development (see Attachment C, Project Proposal) independent of the City’s MASP Update described above. Along with the amendments, the applicant is proposing a mixed-use, common interest subdivision development that would include 224 residential units, approximately 30,000-60,000 square feet of commercial space, and a 1.2-acre Homeowners Association (HOA) managed and maintained park. The proposed residential units would be a mix of attached and detached units with one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom configurations ranging in size from 630 square feet up to 2,002 square feet with an average dwelling unit

Item 7b
size of less than 1,300 square feet. The applicant has described their project as a “greenfield missing middle project” because it utilizes a vacant parcel to construct housescale buildings with multiple units that are compatible in scale and form with detached single-family homes, while located in a walkable neighborhood.

The project proposal does not include an affordable housing plan but proposes the provision of a limited number of deed-restricted, below market rate (BMR) affordable housing units in conjunction with a density bonus and would request several concessions and waivers per State law (the number of units and affordability level has not yet been defined by the applicant, as the application is still conceptual in nature). Most of the proposed units would be market rate. If the project moves forward, it would require General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, Rezoning, Major Development Review, Subdivision Review, and Environmental Review.

Site Data
Location 365 Prado Road
Parcel Size 19.35 acres
General Plan Business Park
Zoning Business Park (BP)
Site Condition Vacant, relatively flat
Surrounding
Uses
North: Residential
South: County
(Chevron Property)
East: Mini Storage /
RV storage / Kennel
West: Entitled
Business Park
Project
Consistency with Community Goals and General Plan Goal, Policies, and Programs Staff has provided a preliminary analysis of the proposed amendment’s consistency with the General Plan, the City’s Major City Goals, and the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP).

Additional analysis and consideration would be included as part of a full project analysis if Council provides direction to staff to move forward with processing the project. 2023-25 Major City Goals
Housing and Homelessness has been identified as one of the 2023-25 Major City Goals.

As such, the 2023-25 Financial plan includes efforts to support housing development including a task to update the MASP to consider more housing options, as discussed above. One benefit of the MASP update is to create additional residential capacity ahead of the RNHA allocation for the 7th Cycle Housing Element, which is expected in 2026.

Currently, the City has sufficient inventory of zoned land for the purpose of accomplishing build-out as anticipated by the Land Use Element and the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

The applicant is requesting to move forward independent of the City’s MASP update and introduce a new land use to 365 Prado that currently does not exist in the MASP. Staff

Item 7b
has planned for work on the MASP Update to begin in June 2024 and anticipates that the two projects would be reviewed and processed with similar timeframes. It should be noted that if both efforts move forward they will include support from consultants to assist staff with processing of the projects, however, concurrent processing will take time and resources away from each other.

Reginal Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
The City has been allotted 3,354 residential units that it must be able to accommodate within the City limits as part of the 2020 Housing Element. The City has made significant progress toward meeting its RHNA mandate, meeting 54% of the total RHNA halfway through the 2020-2028 6th Cycle Housing Element period. However, while the City has issued permits for Above Moderate dwelling units in excess of its requirement for this income category (Above Moderate RHNA target is 1,406 and 2,143 have been completed), more progress is needed in the BMR income categories (RHNA target 1,948; completed 407). The proposed project at 365 Prado is conceptual in nature and does not provide sufficient details on all aspects of the project, including affordable housing.

However, the proposal does state that the project will include a density bonus. If the project requests a 20% density bonus, for example, it would be required to provide 5% of the base density as very low-income deed restricted units. Based on the project proposing 224 dwelling units, 212 units would be market rate and 12 units would be very low-income.

If the 224-dwelling unit project provides 10% of the base density as low-income units to receive a 20% density bonus, 25 would be low-income deed restricted units and the remaining 199 units would be market rate.

General Plan Goals, Policies and Programs
Housing Element Policy 5.3 states “Encourage the development of a variety of ‘missing middle’ housing types and Housing Element Program 5.4 states “Evaluate and implement ‘missing middle’ housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cottages, etc.) to increase housing options in the City within three years of adopting the Housing Element.” The different unit types within the project would be designed and constructed in clusters rather than in homogenous pods as is typical of product-segmented neighborhoods. The various unit types would be connected and organized through a central walkway in the “Mews” portion of the project. Overall, the proposed project would include 159 for-sale single family attached and detached units and 65 for-rent apartments.

Land Use Element Policy 8.1.3 states in part that “The City shall consider this area [MASP] as potentially appropriate to accommodate additional housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residential development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed.” The proposed project would amend the MASP to introduce a new land use (Service Commercial) to the Plan to allow a mixed-use development on property that currently does not allow such development.

Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP)
Most of 365 Prado Road parcel is not located within any safety zones of the 2021 ALUP.

However, one portion, the southwestern corner of property, is located within Safety Zone 3 and shown with a red line in Attachment C, page 5, Figure 1. The project is proposing

Item 7b
park space and commercial development in this area of the property and appears to be consistent with the lower density development requirements for Safety Zone 3.

Impacts on Adjacent Areas and Shared Resources
Impacts of the proposed amendment and associated development on adjacent parcels and resources would be analyzed in detail as part of the project if Council provides direction to staff to proceed with processing the project. However, as noted above, analysis of the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendment would be focused on 365 Prado and would not include a comprehensive review of the entire MASP, as included in Council’s MCG work plan for Housing & Homelessness.

Next Steps
Staff is requesting that Council provide direction to staff and the applicant regarding next steps based on the following menu of actions:

1. Direct staff to initiate and move forward with the proposed amendments to the MASP and associated development plan for 365 Prado as described in the applicant’s project proposal (Attachment C).

2. Direct staff to move forward with the proposed amendments and associated development plan but with direction to staff and the applicant on Council’s desired revisions to the development plan.

3. Direct staff to not move forward with the proposed project. 365 Prado, along with the other Business Park zoned parcels along Prado Road, will be considered for additional housing options as part of the City’s MASP update.

Public Engagement
This item is on the Council Agenda for April 2, 2024, and staff has provided all required notifications. The public may have an opportunity to comment on this item at or before the meeting.

CONCURRENCE
This staff report was reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department, Finance Department, City Attorney and City Administration.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378. If the project moves forward, the project would be subject to the appropriate environmental review as required per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed amendments.

Item 7b

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2023-25
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $0 $0 $0 $0
There will be no net fiscal impact related to initiating the proposed project. If directed to proceed, the applicant will be required to fund the review and processing of the proposed amendments and associated analysis (including a fiscal analysis of the proposed project and if there are any impacts to the City).

ALTERNATIVES

1. Direct staff to initiate and move forward with the proposed amendments to the MASP and associated development plan for 365 Prado.

2. Direct staff to move forward with the proposed amendments and associated development plan but with direction to staff and the applicant on Council desired revisions to the development plan.

3. Direct staff to not move forward with the proposed project.

ATTACHMENTS
A - MASP zoning map with 2021 ALUP safety zones
B - MASP zoning map with old 2002 ALUP safety zones
C - Project Proposal – 365 Prado Residential Mixed-Use Project, General Plan and MASP Amendment Initiation Request

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs
rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs
rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Prado Road
Margarita AvenueCalle Malva
Calle Jazmin
South Hills
Broad Street
Capitolio Way
Industrial Way
Margarita Area Specific Plan
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
0 50 100 200
Meters
access court, med density
Business Park
Business park-1 story - masonry
bpo
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
business park - outdoor use only
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Greenspace
Greenway
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
Medium Density Residential SF
Medium High Density & Minor Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
# # # #
# # # #
Neighborhood Commercial SF
Open Space
Open Space - Hills
Open Space - Riparian
rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs
Neighborhood Park
Streets

Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y
Sports Fields
Special Use
street_medians
trails
.

Acacia
Creek
1:8,500
Airport Safety Zone
2 3
4 6

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs
rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs
rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Prado Road
Margarita AvenueCalle Malva
Calle Jazmin
South Hills
Broad Street
Capitolio Way
Industrial Way
Margarita Area Specific Plan
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
0 50 100 200
Meters
access court, med density
Business Park
Business park-1 story - masonry
bpo
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
business park - outdoor use only
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Greenspace
Greenway
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
# # # # #
# # # # #
# # # # #
Medium Density Residential SF
Medium High Density & Minor Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
# # # #
# # # #
Neighborhood Commercial SF
Open Space
Open Space - Hills
Open Space - Riparian
rs rs rs rs
rs rs rs rs
Neighborhood Park
Streets

Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y
Sports Fields
Special Use
street_medians
trails
.

Acacia
Creek
1:8,500
Old ALUP Zones
Safety Area S-1a
Safety Area S-1b
Safety Area S-1c
Safety Area S-2

365 Prado Development Team
Project Developer Covelop
San Luis Obispo, California
Planning and Management Peck Planning and Development, LLC Morro Bay, California
Architecture Opticos Architects
Berkeley, California
Civil Engineering
Noise and Acoustics
Survey
Legal/Land Use/CEQA
Above Grade
San Luis Obispo, California
dB45
San Luis Obispo, California
Above Grade
San Luis Obispo, California
Monchamp Meldrum LLP
Sacramento, California

December 22, 2023
Rachel Cohen, Senior Planner
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
Dear Rachel:

Thank you for your assistance in moving the 365 Prado Project forward. On behalf of Covelop, atached is the requested informa�on to ini�ate the General Plan Amendment and the MASP Specific Plan amendments to facilitate the project. The project has benefited from staff comments, and from the input from the neighborhood. With regard to the jus�fica�on for the ini�a�on, the atached narra�ve and graphics provide the necessary analysis and support. In summary and rela�ve to the requirements of City Municipal Code Sec�on

17.130.020:

Proposed Amendment. The project would involve the change in the current BP zoning to CS to accommodate the residen�al and commercial components. The CS zone would apply in ALUP Zones 2 and 6, with the later airport compa�bility zone permi�ng residen�al development. Residen�al development is not permited in ALUP Zone 2 and none is proposed by this project. The project would include a 1.2-acre developer constructed and HOA maintained park to address the un-met need for a neighborhood park for the project, Serra Meadows and Toscana neighborhoods. Required General Plan, Zoning and MASP changes are detailed in the atached star�ng at Page 13.

Beter Reflec�on of Community Desires. Housing is s�ll a high priority for the community and the project provides housing types that are not currently being provided. The project includes “Missing Middle” housing, in a greenfield development context, and directly implements Housing Element Policy 5.3 and Program 5.4 of which direct the City to “Encourage the development of a variety of “missing middle” housing types” and to “Evaluate and implement “missing middle” housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cotages, etc.) to increase housing op�ons in the City within three years of adop�ng the Housing Element”. The project land uses are preferred by the neighborhood, based on two community mee�ngs on the proposal. The preference for dele�ng or significantly reducing the exis�ng office/RD designa�on was confirmed at these mee�ngs, with 23 of 24 atendees expressing a preference for the proposed project over exis�ng zoning. Fiscal sustainability is a Major Community Goal, and the analysis in the atached narra�ve determined that the project would generate $12.7 million in City impact fees, compared to $7.1 million in impact fees with the current zoning, and without any new obliga�ons associated with those impact fees. The project would generate $157.1 million in assessed value compared to $100 million under exis�ng zoning, and would generate $298,900 in annual revenue to the City, compared to $174,500 under the exis�ng zoning (if it ever fully builds out). The project would generate $1.6 million in addi�onal parks impact fees.

Re-Evalua�on of Community Needs. Housing is s�ll a Major City Goal and an economic and social need.

There is no demonstrable need for the kind of development that could occur with the current zoning based on buildout projec�ons in the 2014 Land Use and Circula�on Element (LUCE) update. According to Table 2 in the atached narra�ve there is a demand for approximately 700,000 square feet of office/RD space in the community over the next ten years. According to Table 2.4-3 of the LUCE Dra� EIR, there is capacity for 450,800 square feet of office space on poten�al development sites, 1,386,200 square feet of office space in previously approved specific plans, and an addi�onal 25,900 square feet of space of previously approved projects, for a total of 1,872,900 square feet of office/RD space to meet the approximate 700,000 square feet of demand over the next ten years. The current zoning on the property was driven by the land use restric�ons in the 2005 Airport Land Use Plan, which has since been amended to allow residen�al uses on the property. Land Use Element Policy 8.1.3 provides that “The City shall consider this area [MASP] as poten- �ally appropriate to accommodate addi�onal housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residen�al development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed.” The proposed amendment implements LUCE Policy 8.1.3.

Effect on Adjacent Areas. The project complements the residen�al development to the north by providing needed park facili�es. The project site also shares storm drainage resources with adjacent proper�es and those will not be affected by the proposal. The project design has also been developed in considera�on of planned or exis�ng land uses.

Reinforce Exis�ng Policies. The project directly implements a number of General Plan policies. First, it directly implements Housing Element Policy 5.3 and Program 5.4 of which direct the City to “Encourage the development of a variety of “missing middle” housing types” and to “Evaluate and implement “missing middle” housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cotages, etc.) to increase housing op�ons in the City within three years of adop�ng the Housing Element”. Second, it directly addresses a park facility services gap iden�fied in Figure 4-2 of the Parks and Recrea�on Element, and implements Parks and Recrea�on Policies 1.3 and 1.7 rela�ng to addressing such gaps. Third, the project addresses the Fiscal Sustainability Major City Goal by genera�ng addi�onal fiscal resources without genera�ng new fiscal obliga�ons In total, the project would generate $298,900 in annual revenue to the City, compared to $174,500 under the exis�ng zoning if it ever fully builds out. Fourth, the project would immediately create $3.7 million in water impact fees, $3.5 million in wastewater impact fees, $3.4 million in traffic fees, $1.6 million in park fees, and $407,000 in Public Safety Impact fees, without the need for significant infrastructure improvements. Overall, the project will generate $12.7 million in City impact fees, compared to $7.1 million in impact fees with the current zoning (if or when such development ever occurs). Fi�h, the project would provide addi�onal housing in an area adequately served by city u�li�es, without reducing commercial building area below City needs. Finally, since the project is providing predominantly housing rather than jobs, it will serve to beter balance jobs and housing in the community and likely result in a long term reduc�on in VMT in the county.

Sincerely,
Stephen J. Peck, AICP

Application to Initiate Amendments:

General Plan Map
& Margarita Area Specific Plan Map and Text
365 Prado Road
APPLICANT: Covelop, Inc.

REPRESENTATIVE: Stephen Peck, AICP
ADDRESS: 365 Prado Road
EXISTING LAND USE/ZONING: MASP Business Park
PROPOSED LAND USE/ZONING: MASP CS; CS Mixed Use ; MASP Text Changes Summary
A project is proposed at 365 Prado
Road that will provide for a mix of residential
and commercial uses that address City Council priorities for the development of workforce and “missing middle” housing in the community.
“Missing Middle Housing is a range of housescale buildings with multiple units –compatible in scale and form with detached singlefamily homes—located in a walkable neighborhood” (https://missingmiddlehousing.com). The term applies to such housing in an infill context on individual lots or small parcels, and to larger “greenfield” development, which is the missing middle housing type we are proposing. Opticos Design, which coined the term “missing middle,” developed the definition, and “wrote the book” on missing middle housing, has designed many greenfield missing middle developments, including Prairie Queen in Pavilion, NE; Mew homes in South Jordan, UT; and Cul de Sac Tempe in Tempe, AZ. We envision our project being a fusion of the above projects, drawing the best attributes of each, while addressing the needs of the surrounding community and constraints/opportunities of the site. We hope it will be the demonstration project that the City has identified in the Housing Element and their Major City Goals to “…evaluate and implement “missing middle” housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cottages, etc.) to increase housing options….” The proposed project would include 224 dwelling units and approximately 30,000-60,000 square feet of commercial uses consistent with the CS zone. Overall, the project would have 246 Density Units, approximately 21 density units per acre for the CS-Zoned area of the site that is eligible for residential development under the 2021 Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). For sale single-family attached and detached units will have a mix of one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom units ranging in size from 630 square feet up to 2,002 square feet with an average dwelling unit size of less than 1,300 square feet, approximately 20 percent lower than the typical offerings in the San Luis Obispo residential

365 Prado Road 2 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
market. The project will follow Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) guidelines, meaning that it would be designed as an integrated whole, with everything having a rhyme and reason.

The project checks a lot of the city’s “boxes” as follows:

1. It directly implements Housing Element Policy 5.3 and Program 5.4 which direct the City to “Encourage the development of a variety of “missing middle” housing types” and to “Evaluate and implement “missing middle” housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cottages, etc.) to increase housing options in the City within three years of adopting the Housing Element”. The project will demonstrate how Missing Middle development can be applied on a larger scale for “greenfield” projects as opposed to a more limited infill scale.

2. It implements City Parks and Recreation Element policies to urge the development of parks in neighborhoods without parks, either through access improvements or by the construction of new parks.

3. The Financial Plan which mentions “initiating a missing middle housing program” where existing infrastructure can support additional infill and intensification and promote complete neighborhood by including more diversity in housing options of all types.

4. Housing Element Policy 6.2 that provides priority for low income housing.

Elected officials, City staff and the residents of the Serra Meadows and Toscana neighborhoods have been consulted about the advisability of moving forward with the project. All of these meetings have been met with enthusiasm and support.

Implementation of the project will require certain amendments to the General Plan and Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) as specified herein. The General Plan and Zoning will be amended to show C-S land uses, and the MASP will require amendments to the text, maps and graphics as described herein. We request that the City authorize the necessary MASP and General Plan amendments to move the project forward. These changes are warranted and desirable because:

1. The proposed housing types are a high priority for the City and doing the amendment now will reduce the timeframe for development and construction by several years.

2. Direct costs of development for the project will be lower and more households will qualify.

3. There is also no demonstrable need for the office space and industrial space associated with the current zoning of the property. According to the LUCE EIR, the City currently has approximately

1.9 million square feet of available office/RD building capacity against a ten-year demand of approximately 700,000 square feet communitywide. The site would reduce that potential by less than 15 percent to 1.65 million square feet.

4. Parks and Recreation Policies 1.3 and 1.7 direct that gaps in park service areas be remedied.

365 Prado Road 3 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023

5. The project generates $12.7 million in City impact fees, compared to $7.1 million in impact fees with the current zoning, and without any new obligations associated with those impact fees.

The project would generate $157.1 million in assessed value compared to $100 million under existing zoning and would generate $298,900 in annual revenue to the City, compared to $174,500 under the existing zoning (if it ever fully builds out).

In sum, allowing the project by initiating and approving the requested MASP and General Plan amendments would reduce housing costs and be economically positive to the City for both one-time impact fees and ongoing revenue. There does not appear to be a compelling reason to not initiate the amendment.

Introduction
A project is proposed at 365 Prado Road that will provide for a mix of residential and commercial uses that address City Council priorities for the development of workforce housing in the community. It is being positioned to address housing and employment needs in the community through a combination of design excellence, value-added features, location, design, and a range of housing types and sizes that are not being met in the community. Proposed by Covelop Holdings of San Luis Obispo, it is located at the southeast corner of Prado Road and Davis/Serra Meadows Drive. (See Figure 1.) The project involves the change in general plan designation, rezoning and an amendment to the Margarita Area Specific Plan from BP to CS for 16.4 acres of the project. There will be a1.2- acre HOA-maintained park intended to be open to the public.

As currently planned, the proposed project would be a “mixed use” project within the meaning of Table 1 of the Land Use and Circulation Element, and Table 2-1 and Section 17.70.130 of the Zoning Ordinance. The project includes approximately 159 attached and detached single family homes at a density of 20.5 density units to the acre: 65 for-rent apartments units and approximately 30,000-60,000 square feet of mini storage/office/RD space. A 1.2-acre park is proposed to fill the current geographic and timing gap to provide adequate park facilities for the Serra Meadows and Toscana neighborhoods.

Those neighborhoods are deficient in park area and are currently dependent solely on the development of the MASP neighborhood park on the Garcia property, which has a low likelihood of developing over the next 20 years. The project would add needed park facilities and provide an alternate means of meeting such needs as provided in Parks and Recreation Policies 1.3 and 1.7. The project would provide a park in a park access gap identified in Figure 4-2 of the Parks and Recreation Element. Because of the design of the project and potential to meeting neighborhood park facility needs, the project is strongly supported by the existing neighborhood who were consulted about the project during two neighborhood workshops.

The project will follow guidelines for Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND), meaning that it would be designed as an integrated whole, with everything having a rhyme and reason. Care is taken with details such as the height of the porches from the ground, the connectivity of homes with amenities, open spaces and other housing product types. Each neighborhood is walkable and clustered around common open space, yards, and a recreation center with a community building. No residential unit is ever more than 500 feet from a park or trail, with a variety of housing options fronting parks,

365 Prado Road 4 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
walking paths, and streets. The development also ensures compatibility with the existing neighborhood through consistent building massing and gentle density transitions.

The project will also emphasize “Missing Middle” housing types. The term "missing middle" is meant to describe housing types that were common in the pre-WWII United States such as duplexes, rowhouses, and courtyard apartments but are now less common and, therefore, "missing". Rather than focusing on the number of units in a structure, missing middle housing emphasizes scale and heights that are appropriate for single-family neighborhoods or transitional neighborhoods, but at densities that have been more typical of multi-family stacked flat developments. This approach allows the introduction of smaller floor plans, but with the massing and building arrangement that are more typical of single family detached developments. Missing middle units are characterized as being within a walkable context, smaller footprint unit sizes, lower perceived density, high design and detailing, less parking demand and supply because they are placed in walkable neighborhoods. They are also affordable by design because they rely on simple Type V construction, so that there are not the typical tradeoffs of higher density resulting in higher per-square foot costs.

Missing middle housing has been used as an infill strategy to achieve higher densities in low density zoned areas while still preserving existing building massing and single family street scenes patterns, as well as larger scale projects that provide an integrated eclectic mix of housing types. Accordingly, Missing Middle housing is highly sought after by millennials and empty nester baby boomers, the two biggest elements of the local residential development market.

Various studies are underway for the project, including a biological reconnaissance study, wetland delineation, geotechnical study, noise study, traffic study (including capacity and lane configuration studies for Prado Road and Higuera), and others to satisfy City requirements. It is expected that the environmental effects of the projects, and necessary mitigations, will be covered in an environmental impact report (EIR).

365 Prado Road 5 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Figure 1 Site Location and Vicinity

365 Prado Road 6 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Mixed Use/Common Interest Subdivision
The City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance require that any residential development in the CS zone be “mixed use”, and Section 17.70.130 establishes guidelines for such developments. Developments can be master planned and entitled as a single project, and there can be subsequent lot splits and parcelization if the parcels are subject to the necessary entitlements and maintenance and management documents to ensure ongoing operation of the project as a mixed use development. Each individual small lot or large conveyance lot in our project will not be “mixed use” and the project will use the provision of Section 16.17.020 for common interest subdivisions that provide for compliance of “…property development standards such as lot coverage and density are determined by using the exterior boundaries of the property and where standards apply to the project as a whole instead of requiring conformance with all property development standards on each of the proposed parcels/units in the subdivision.

These types of subdivisions can rely on shared ownerships as is the case with subdivisions with common interests (i.e., condominiums) or may also rely solely on or in part with easements for common areas such as recreation facilities, open space, parking, driveways, etc.” The park and drainage basin/infrastructure will be common ownership elements. Within our project, small lot tract maps and larger lot conveyance maps will be subject to a Homeowner’s Association, one or more Property Owner’s Associations (for commercial or multifamily rental parcels), and Joint Management and Maintenance Agreements.

It is anticipated that the project will request a concession of the ground floor use limitations in Zoning Ordinance Section 17.70.130 D. 1 relating to requirements for the minimum amount of ground floor commercial as part of its Density Bonus application, but the project will comply in all other materials ways with the mixed use requirements of the CS Zone. Additionally, the project will request waivers of development standards to accommodate the proposed project including setback and lot size requirements as allowed through California Density Bonus Law.

Project Data and Design
The project plans in Attachment 1 show a mixture of single family attached and single family detached units ranging in size from 630 square feet to 2,002 square feet. The different unit types will be designed and constructed in clusters rather than in homogenous pods as is typical of product-segmented neighborhoods. The various unit types will be connected and organized through a central walkway in the “Mews” portion of the project that will originate at Prado Road and Davis Street and terminate at the park. There is a total of 224 dwelling units, with 159 of those as single family attached and detached units which are intended for sale. The project also includes 65 for-rent apartments, ranging in size from 480 square feet to 1,000 square feet. The total density of the project is 246.26 density units, or 21.8 density units per acre. Total permitted density is 270.7 density units per acre. Table 1 shows the summary of the land uses and the development. (See Figure 2, Land Use Plan, and Figure 3, Site Plan.)

365 Prado Road 7 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Table 1
Land Use and Development Summary
The project proposes to construct approximately up to 60,000 square feet of commercial space (potentially mini storage or light industrial uses) in the area of the site in ALUP Zone 2 that does not permit residential development. Under the current zoning designation for 19.5 acres of Business Park, the project would accommodate 277,500 SF of office/RD space. Based on the projected demand for office/RD space in the community as itemized in Table 2 below, it is unlikely that level of development will ever occur. According to Table 2 below, there is a demand for approximately 700,000 square feet of office/RD space in the community over the next ten years. According to Table 2.4-3 of the LUCE Draft EIR, there is capacity for 450,800 square feet of office space on potential development sites, 1,386,200 square feet of office space in previously approved specific plans, and an additional 25,900 square feet of space of previously approved projects, for a total of 1,872,900 square feet of office/RD space to meet the approximate 700,000 square feet of demand over the next ten years. And there is currently 400,000 square feet of vacant building space on the market, not including office space conversions that are possible in the downtown, and not including major pending projects like The Link along Tank Farm Road. If the project captures as much as 20% of total unmet demand project to occur over the next 10 years, only 40,000 to 60,000 square feet of office/RD space could reasonably be expected to occur over that time frame. Even if all of the current BP property in the MASP that is now eligible for residential development was so converted, it would result in a reduction of office/RD development capacity of the community 600,000 square feet to 1,272,900 square feet of office/RD, which is four times the need over the next ten years that is not being addressed by existing vacant buildings.

Data Total Sale Rent C-S Parks Streets
Net Site Area 19.35 9.52 1.76 3.87 1.15 3.05
Units 224 159 65 -
Studio 16 - 16 -
1BR 36 20 16 -
2BR 87 54 33 -
3BR 85 85 - -
Density Units 246.26 194.70 51.56 -
Density Units/Acre 21.83 20.45 29.30
Doors/Acre 19.86 16.70 36.93
FAR 53.2% 66.6% 35.6%
Total Building Area 331,498 220,418 51,080 60,000 -
Garage Area 16,160 16,160 - -
Floor Area 315,338 204,258 51,080 60,000 -

365 Prado Road 8 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Table 2
Commercial Space Needs Projection
The preference for deleting or significantly reducing the existing office/RD designation was confirmed at a neighborhood meeting. Of the 24 neighbors in attendance, 23 expressed a preference for the proposed project over existing zoning. The conclusions drawn from the above analysis and the community meetings is that the current office/RD designation is not needed to support employment growth in the community and is not supported by the community. Keeping the existing BP designation will only perpetuate the bloated inventory of vacant office/RD land that was created from the 2005 ALUP constraints.

Early in the project during two community meetings and design charettes, there was a need expressed for a public park. Under the MASP, the parks for the neighborhood were to be provided in a central neighborhood park on the Garcia property located to the east of the current terminus of Prado Road. The Garcia property has a low likelihood of developing over the next 20 years. The Parks and Recreation Element identifies a park “gap” identified in Figure 4-2 of the Parks and Recreation Element. The project would add a 1.1-acre park. Figure 4 shows the open space and park proposed for the project.

The project has ready access to sewer, water, storm drainage and roads. The site has drainage rights to the Serra Meadows basin, and sewer, water and storm drainage connections are available at the side of the Davis Road/Prado Road intersection. Road frontage improvements will be required, but no offsite improvements are needed.

Industry Title
Base Year
Employment
Estimate
2018[2][3]
Projected
Year
Employment
Estimate
2028
Numeric
Change
2018-2028
SF per
Employee
Occupied
Building
Space
Demand
Vacancy
Factor
Total
Building
Demand
Industrial Office/RD Hospitality
Wholesale Trade 2,700 2,800 100 - - - - - -
Information 1,300 1,600 300 250 75,000 3,750 78,750 78,750 Finance and Insurance 2,300 2,300 - 250 - - - - - -
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1,600 1,800 200 250 50,000 2,500 52,500 52,500 Accommodation and Food Services 17,600 20,300 2,700 250 675,000 33,750 708,750 708,750 Other Services (excludes 814-Private Household Workers) 4,000 4,400 400 250 100,000 5,000 105,000 105,000 Mining, Logging, and Construction 7,900 8,800 900 1000 900,000 45,000 945,000 945,000 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 20,900 21,600 700 500 350,000 17,500 367,500 367,500 Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities 3,900 4,500 600 500 300,000 15,000 315,000 315,000 Nondurable Goods Manufacturing 4,500 5,300 800 500 400,000 20,000 420,000 420,000 Manufacturing 7,700 8,800 1,100 500 550,000 27,500 577,500 577,500 Durable Goods Manufacturing 3,200 3,500 300 500 150,000 7,500 157,500 157,500 Retail Trade 14,300 14,300 - 300 - - - - - -
Financial Activities 3,900 4,100 200 300 60,000 3,000 63,000 63,000 Professional and Business Services 10,800 11,600 800 300 240,000 12,000 252,000 252,000 Educational Services (Private), Health Care, and Social Assistance 17,700 21,300 3,600 300 1,080,000 54,000 1,134,000 1,134,000 Local Government 13,100 13,300 200 300 60,000 3,000 63,000 63,000 State Government 10,800 10,700 (100) 300 (30,000) (1,500) (31,500) (31,500) Self Employment[4] 8,800 9,500 700 450 315,000 15,750 330,750 330,750 Total Farm 5,200 6,500 1,300 - - - - - -
Private Household Workers[5] 200 200 - 0 - - - - - -
Total MSA 162,400 177,200 14,800 5,275,000 263,750 5,538,750 2,782,500 2,047,500 708,750 SLO City Capture @ 35% 9.11% - - 1,938,563 973,875 716,625 248,063 2018-2028 Industry Employment Projections
San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles-Arroyo Grande Metropolitan Statistical Area (San Luis Obispo County)

365 Prado Road 9 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Figure 2 Proposed Land Use and Zoning Plan

365 Prado Road 10 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Figure 3 Building Types Site Plan

365 Prado Road 11 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Figure 4 Open Space and Parks

365 Prado Road 12 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Entitlement and Land Use Regulations
The current zoning on the property, and in fact in the entire MASP, was driven by the land use restrictions in the 2005 Airport Land Use Plan that generally prohibited residential land uses south of Prado Road, and substantially reduced the allowed number or residential units in the remainder of the specific plan area. The County completed an update to the ALUP in 2021 and residential land uses are now permitted on 12.5 acres of the project site’s 19.4 acres under the new ALUP. The LUCE has not been amended since its original adoption in 2014 to address this new information and the modified restriction, but Land Use Element Policy 8.1.3 provides that “The City shall consider this area [MASP] as potentially appropriate to accommodate additional housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residential development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed.” The City has begun scoping the required studies and processes for an update to the MASP. That amendment will start with technical studies, followed by environmental review and will conclude with modification of the General Plan and Specific Plan. A likely timeframe for completion is three to five years.

The city’s efforts in the larger amendment will be primarily focused on the evaluation and development of environmental and planning documents for the 160-acre Garcia property in the eastern portion of the MASP, which are somewhat unrelated to the subject property. There are no improvements that need to be installed or key questions answered related to the MASP that are necessary to move forward with the subject project and waiting for the MASP to be completed before starting on this project will only delay implementation by 5-7 years. Proceeding with this project will not compromise the other effort and has the following advantages:

1. Since there is no obvious demonstrated need for the office/RD space that would be eliminated from this site, there is no real need to look at this in a global context. The City is oversupplied with office/RD land. The project site has been vacant with the current land use designation for the past 20 years and it is unlikely that it will develop in the future as currently zoned.

2. The project is proposing a housing type that is not currently being provided in the marketplace and provides housing at a smaller size and lower price point. The City has placed a high priority on “missing middle” housing and this project delivers the first project in a greenfield context.

3. The project will qualify for a density bonus by providing 5% very low density units (either for sale or for rent). Excluding the future public roads and the areas within Zone 6 of the ALUP, the site is 11.26 acres yielding a maximum residential density of 270.24 units. We are proposing 14 density units as deed restricted to qualifying very low incomes.

4. The project requires little new infrastructure. The housing would come without any significant city obligations for infrastructure or infrastructure reimbursement. Despite little need for new infrastructure, the project would immediately create $3.7 million in water impact fees, $3.5 million in wastewater impact fees, $3.4 million in traffic fees, $1.6 million in park fees, and $407,000 in Public Safety Impact fees. Overall, the project will generate $12.7 million in City impact fees, compared to $7.1 million in impact fees with the current zoning (if or when such development ever occurs).

365 Prado Road 13 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023

5. The project would provide a much-needed park. The need has been identified for a park at this specific site in the Recreation and Parks Element and is a high priority of the residents in the area. The residents want something like this sooner than later.

6. The project has been reviewed by the affected neighbors and elected officials without any real objections raised.

7. This land use/zone change is supported by LUCE Policy 8.1.3, as well as MASP policies to support mixed use developments; Parks and Recreation Policies 1.3 and 1.7 relating to addressing gaps in park access identified in Figure 4-2 of the Parks and Recreation Element; and, the 2020 Housing Element Policy 5.3 and Program 5.4 of which direct the City to “Encourage the development of a variety of “missing middle” housing types” and to “Evaluate and implement “missing middle” housing types (e.g., duplex, quadplex, cottages, etc.) to increase housing options in the City within three years of adopting the Housing Element”. Starting this project now helps the City meet the deadline for evaluating and encouraging missile middle housing.

8. The project would generate $157.1 million in assessed value compared to $100 million under existing zoning. While the city does not participate in the base property taxes, the proposed project would generate $84,000 per year in State Property Taxes In Lieu compared to $59,300 with the existing zoning. Further, the project would generate $110,000 per year in local sales taxes (share of Bradley-Burns plus local measure), whereas the office/RD uses would generate no sales taxes. In total, the project would generate $298,900 in annual revenue to the City, compared to $174,500 under the existing zoning if it ever fully builds out.

365 Prado Road 14 of 14
GP and MASP Amendment Initiation
November 2023
Required General Plan and Zoning Changes

1. Change the land use designation for the property to CS, CS-Mixed Use, and PF as represented in Figure 2.

Required MASP Changes
In addition to the LUCE land use and zoning changes, there are a number of changes that are necessary to the MASP, as follows:

1. Figure 5—Residential Development Areas to be amended to include project site. Change name to “Potential Residential Development Areas”.

2. Delete the reference to “dwellings” being prohibited in Section 2.6.1 D.

3. Review and modify FAR limitations as necessary.

4. Amend Figures 10 and 11 to reflect revised ALUP safety zones. Delete references to unit limitations within the various subareas of the MASP and instead refer to unit limitations and development requirements in the ALUP. (The City recently amended Section 17.70.020 of the Zoning Ordinance to require that “All projects including but not limited to renovation, remodeling, new construction, or granting of any permits for land uses or other activities, shall be consistent with the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria of the Amended and Restated San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport (SBP) Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP).” This change would bring the MASP into conformance with the Zoning that is applicable to the rest of the City.

5. Figure 12—Circulation Plan is inconsistent with General Plan Circulation Figure 1—Streets Classification Diagram. The latter shows an E-W “Proposed Local Street” on the southern onethird of the property paralleling Prado Road. MASP Figure 12 and the development plan will need to be modified to be consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element.

6. Delete Table 13 and Figure 23 relating to phasing of improvements. It essentially requires completion of Prado Road to Broad Street before development on the site is permitted.

Modify land use tables to reflect the addition of residential units to General BP land use category.

Other Needed Entitlements

1. Concession of ground floor commercial requirement and waivers of development standards (setbacks, lot size, etc.) as part of the density bonus application.

2. Adjustment to parking and setback requirements through the MASP amendment, or density bonus program.

3. Vesting Subdivision Map, plus large lot conveyance map.