R 3404
RESOLUTION NO. 3404
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE ,
VILLAGE GLEN ANNEXATION. AND ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande as the lead agency has prepared an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Village Glen Annexation project, including
General Plan Amendment 97-004, Development Code Amendment 97-009,
Vesting Tentative Tract 2265, and Planned Unit Development 97-563 ("Project");
and
WHEREAS, the EIR has been prepared and circulated for public review in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEOA) and the CEOA Guidelines, and
the City's Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEOA and the CEOA
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project and responding to the
comments raised during the public review period and at the public hearings has been
prepared which incorporates written responses to comments received on the Draft EIR
in accordance with CEOA and the City's CEOA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande held a duly noticed
public hearing on November 2, 1999, and the City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing on November 9, 1999, at which all interested persons were given the
opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has adopted Resolution No.
3403 certifying that the Final EIR was completed in compliance with CEOA, the CEOA
Guidelines, and the City's CEOA Procedures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered information contained in the
Final Environmental Impact Report on the Village Glen Annexation.
NOW. THEREFEORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande as follows:
1. The City Council certifies that it has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Project.
2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the implementation of
the Project may have a significant effect on the environment:
--~.--, ------"
,..-..,
Resolution No. 3404
Page 2 of 15
Statement of Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation
Measures, attached to this Resolution as Attachment "A" and
incorporated herein by reference, mitigation measures have been
incorporated into the Project that will avoid or substantially lessen
the adverse environmental impacts for traffic identified in the Final
EIR;
b. that, based on information set forth in the Final EIR and in. the
Statement of Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation
Measures, the adverse environmental effects related to traffic are
significant environmental effects that cannot be entirely mitigated or
avoided if the Project is approved;
c. that no additional adverse impacts will have a significant effect or
result in a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in
the environment as a result of Project approval;
d. that all significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR
have been reduced to an acceptable level in that:
(1 ) all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially reduced as
determined through the findings set forth in paragraph 3.a of
this Resolution;
(2) based upon the Final EIR and Statement of Significant
Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures and other
documents in the record, specific economic, social, and other
considerations make infeasible other project alternatives
identified in the Final EI R;
(3) based on the Final EIR and the Statement of Significant
Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures, and other
documents in the record, all remaining, unavoidable
significant environmental effects of the Village Glen
Annexation Project are overridden by the benefits of the
Project as described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, attached to this Resolution as Attachment
"B" and incorporated herein by reference, which Statement of
Overriding Considerations is hereby approved and adopted by
the City Council.
Resolution No. 3404
Page 3 of 15
4. The City Council authorizes and directs that the Director of
Administrative Services promptly file a Notice of Determination with
respect to the Final EIR for the Project, specifically referencing therein
that mitigation measures have been made a condition of project
approval, findings have been made pursuant to Section 15091 of the
CEOA Guidelines, and that a Statement of Overriding Considerations
has been adopted.
On motion of Council Member Ferrara, seconded by Council Member Runels, and on
the following roll call vote to wit:
A YES: Council Members Ferrara, Runels, Dickens, and Mayor Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Tolley
The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 9th day of November,
1999.
---~
,
Resolution No. 3404
Page 4 of 15
MI~~
ATTEST:
f;u I2/LL
ORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES!
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
~Lw L. Iiui;)
ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER
..
I
i
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,.. .~.,....>~,
Resolution No. 3404
Page 5 of 15
A TT ACHMENT II A II
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The following potentially significant impacts have been identified in connection with
the project, and the following mitigation measures have been adopted to mitigate tbe
potential environmental impacts.
Mitigation A 1: To mitigate impacts on school facilities and enable the school district
to fund projects that include environmental mitigation resulting from school
construction, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with Lucia Mar Unified
School District to provide development impact fees, as determined by the District,
and shall submit proof prior to issuance of building permits.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Applicant to enter into mitigation/impact fee
agreement with Lucia Mar Unified School District.
2) Entity to Take Action: City to verify completion of agreement.
3) Timing/Duration: Prior to building permit issuance.
4) Interested Agencies: Community Development Department, Lucia
Mar Unified School District.
Mitigation B 1 : To mitigate downstream flooding, the applicant has included a
detention basin at the low end of the site and added storm drain inlets and pipes to
route the majority of site runoff through the basin. The basin provides
approximately 2.8 acre~feet of storage volume and will outlet into the existing
Canyon Way channel upstream of the Canyon Way storm drain inlet and pipe.
The detention basin peak discharge for the 100-year storm is approximately 120 cfs,
equal to the 1 O-year undeveloped runoff. Advantages' resulting from the Project
storm drains and detention basin are: 1 ) Reduces downstream runoff to a pre-
development condition, 2) Adds approximately 0.8 acres of ponding for additional
groundwater recharge, 3) Reduces downstream runoff along James Way, 4)
Provides sediment storage during construction. The disadvantage to the detention
basin is that it requires periodic maintenance and cleaning.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Project will require design and installation of a
drainage storm drain pipe system and detention basin in
accordance with City Engineering Standards. Per the development
code, all proposed drainage facilities associated with the Project
shall be based on the 1 00 year storm.
--
~,~".~
Resolution No. 3404
Page 6 of 15
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant to submit drainage plans to the
City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department for review and
approval.
3) Timing/Duration: Plans to be approved prior to construction.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande, State
Department of Fish and Game, and State Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
Mitig~tion 82: To mitigate potential degradation of surface water flows, all storm
water releases should be designed to discharge into the Canyon Way channel and
Tally Ho Creek in a non-erosive manner, and shall be subject to a National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The design of the on-site detention
basin shall allow for the accumulation and removal of sediment.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Applicant to prepare engineering drainage
plans with erosion and siltation measures per City of Arroyo
Grande and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards.
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant to submit erosion plans to the
City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department for review and
approval.
3) Timing/Duration: Prior to construction, monitor during
construction.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande, and State
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Mitigation D1: To avoid or minimize safety risks to school-age pedestrians crossing
James Way, implement one of the following measures:
Mitigation Option 1: Install a traffic signal at James Way and the Project
access street. This traffic signal would operate full time and would be required
to include pedestrian crossing indications, pedestrian actuation, and vehicular
actuation for the side street. The location of the traffic signal equipment along
with advanced warning signs would provide the necessary visibility required for
this type of intersection control.
Mitigation Option 2: Install a traffic signal at James Way and Rodeo Drive
instead of at the Project access street.
Mitigation Option 3: Relocate the Project access street either 150 west or 250
east to gain adequate sight/stopping distance and install all-way STOP signs.
--"....-
Resolution No. 3404
Page 7 of 15
Mitigation Option 4: Install all-way STOP signs as proposed and have a
crossing guard present in the morning and afternoon. James Way should be
posted for 25 MPH when children are present.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: As a condition of Tract approval, require an
engineering analysis to determine the most feasible mitigation
option providing the appropriate level of safety for pedestrians
walking to school.
2) Entity to Take Action: City to require School District/Applicant to
provide engineering study.
3) Timing/Duration: Final mitigation selected and funded prior to
issuance of grading permits.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: LMUSD, State Department of
Education.
Mitigation E1: Groundwater Withdrawal. . Unless the City Council approves other
methods of offsetting the Project water demand, the following measures shall be
incorporated into the Project in order to further reduce impacts on the. groundwater
resource:
The Deer Trail well should be drilled, constructed, and tested as recommended in the
report by the applicant's consultant prior to issuance of a Project grading permit or
final Tract Map approval by the City. Production testing of the well should include,
as a minimum, a 10-hour step-drawdown test at a minimum of 5 steps, a 24- to 48-
hour constant discharge test at a discharge. rate close to the well's maximum
production capability (such as 1 50 gpm, for instance, if possible), and a 4- to 8-hour
recovery test. Throughout all the pumping tests, monitoring and recording of water
levels in the Los Robles del Mar wells and the City's Oak Park well should be
conducted. The test results should be evaluated by a professional qualified in the
discipline, and compared to the assumptions and conclusions of Cleath (1998b) and
this analysis.
If the results of the short-term tests described above verify the assumptions and
conclusions of this analysis, the Deer Trail well should be pumped at the design
project rate (30 to 35 gpm) for a minimum 3D-day period. As before, monitoring
and recording of water levels in the Los Robles del Mar wells and the City's Oak
Park well should be conducted as part of the test.
Monitoring of water levels in the Los Robles del Mar wells should be conducted on a
monthly basis for two years following Project implementation. Regular monitoring of
the City's Oak Park well should continue as part of the City's normal procedures.
Resolution No. 3404
Page 8 of 15
Quarterly water level measurements should be taken after the initial two-year period.
The water levels should be measured during approximately the same weeks each
year.
The applicant's geologist should perform an annual or biennial review of the water
level and water production data.
,
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Project will include drilling, constructing, and
testing of the proposed well, and monitoring of water levels in
nearby observation wells. A qualified professional should review
observation data.
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant to drill and construct well.
Working with City staff, testing should be conducted on the well
and observation well data collected.
3) Timing/Duration: The well to be drilled and short-term testing
conducted as a Tentative Tract Map condition of final approval
prior to grading permit issuance or final Tract Map approval by the
City. Long-term testing to be continued after Project approval.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande, LAFCO.
Mitigation E2: Well Interference. Unless the City Council approves other methods of
offsetting the Project water demand, the following measures shall be incorporated
into the Project to further reduce impacts on the groundwater resource.
Monitoring of water levels in all the Los Robles del Mar wells should be conducted
on a monthly basis for two years following Project implementation. Regular
monitoring of the City's Oak Park well should continue as part of the City's normal
procedures.
The applicant's geologist should perform an annual or biennial review of the water
level and water production data.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1) Action to be Taken: Project will include drilling, constructing, and
testing of the proposed well, and monitoring of water levels in
nearby observation wells. A qualified professional should review
observation data.
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant to drill and construct well.
Working with City staff, testing should be conducted on the well
and observation well data collected.
3) Timing/Duration: The well to be drilled and short-term testing
conducted prior to final Project approval. Long-term testing to be
continued after Project approval.
~_._--
~'_...M'
Resolution No. 3404
Page 9 of 15
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande.
level of Impact after Mitigation: Implementation of the above measures would
reduce potential Project specific impacts of well interference. Therefore no residual
impacts are associated with the development.
Mitigation E3: Water Quality The water quality impacts of the Project are considered
less than significant, provided the assumptions used in this analysis are reasonably
accurate. However, several measures are recommended for implementation into
Project design to further reduce impacts on the groundwater resource:
The Deer Trail should be drilled, constructed, and production tested as recommended
in the report by the applicant's consultant prior to issuance of a grading permit or
final Tract Map approval by the City. Near the end of the short-term production
testing, a water quality sample should be collected by a qualified laboratory
technician, and sampled by a State-certified laboratory.
If elevated concentrations of iron and manganese are found in the water, it will be
necessary to design a blending scheme, or to design and install a well head
treatment system to reduce the iron and manganese concentrations to acceptable
levels.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Project will include drilling, constructing, and
water quality sampling of the proposed well.
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant to drill and construct well, and
contract for sampling and testing of the produced water at a
laboratory approved by the City.
3) Timing/Duration: The well to be drilled, sampled and tested as a
Tentative Tract Map Condition of approval prior to issuance of a
grading permit or final Tract Map approval.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande, State
Department of Health Services, LAFCO .
level of Impact after Mitigation: Implementation of the above measures would
reduce potential Project specific impacts of water quality. Therefore, no residual
impacts are associated with the development.
Mitigation F 1 : To reduce visual impacts of proposed grading on the school site and
to conform with City policy for landform grading, the school grading plan shall be
revised to incorporate the following mitigation techniques.
Resolution No. 3404
Page 10 of 15
. to the extent feasible, use landform grading on cut slopes around
the wooded knoll to be retained in the northwest corner of the
site, with varying slope ratios and curves.
. create varying slope ratios below 2: 1 to the extent feasible on fill
slopes.
. revegetate the cut and fill slopes with plants native or
characteristic to the environs.
. provide tree planting on the slopes and/or in the campus core that
substantially screens or softens the visual appearance on the
school viewed from the north and northeast
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: District, to prepare revised grading plan and
landscape plan to incorporate landform grading and screen
planting.
2) Entity to Take Action: District to submit plan to Community
Development Department for approval.
3) Timing/Duration: Prior to issuance of grading plan.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: Community Development
Department, Public Works Department.
Mitigation G 1 : To mitigate potential impacts to Pismo clarkia a spring survey was
conducted in 1999, which showed no Pismo clarkia. Since the Initial Study upon
which the CDFG based its request for a second study incorrectly identified the
survey as occurring in 1998, it appears the 1999 survey satisfies the CDFG request.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Applicant prepared 1 999 spring survey for
Pismo clarkia~
2) Entity to Take Action: Applicant.
3) Timing/Duration: Prior to grading permit issuance.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: Community Development,
Department of Fish and Game.
Level of Impact After Implementation of Mitigation Measure: Implementation of the
survey adequately confirmed presence/absence of Pismo clarkia.
Mitigation G2: To mitigate removal of significant native and non-native vegetation
that affords watershed protection and potential wildlife habitat, the south-facing fill
slope on the school site shall be revegetated with native trees, shrubs and grasses
up to 30 feet from the top of the slope. Final grading plans shall contain tree
Resolution No. 3404
Page 11 of 15
protection plan to retain eucalyptus trees outside of graded areas. (The top 30 feet
should be low fuel, irrigated planting for fire safety.)
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: School District shall prepare revegetation plan.
for south-facing fill slope.
2) Entity to Take Action: School District.
3) Timing/Duration: Implement prior to occupancy.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande
Community Development and Fire Departments.
Mitigation 1-1 - Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (Project)
The following measures are recommended to reduce PM1Q emissions related to
Project construction activities:
. Water all areas where ongoing construction activity has exposed more
than 500 square feet of bare soil at least twice daily;
. Spray all dirt stockpile areas with water as needed to suppress fugitive I
dust emissions;
. Implement permanent dust control measures identified in the approved
Project revegetation and landscape plans as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
. Stabilize all disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods
approved in advance by the SLOAPCD;
. Pave all roadways, driveways, sidewalks, et cetera, as soon as
possible after grading. Lay building pads as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding and soil binders are used;
. Enforce a speed limit of 15 mph for unpaved surfaces at the
construction site; and
. Sweep paved streets adjacent to the construction site at the end of
each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1) Action to be Taken: The previously-described measures shall be
incorporated into a mitigation plan for construction-generated
particulates that is to be promulgated to on-site constriction
crews.
2) Entity to Take Action: The Applicant shall require the building
contractor to implement this plan.
3) Timing/Duration: The mitigation plan shall be in force throughout-
all construction phases.
~
Resolution No. 3404
Page 12 of 15
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande,
SLOAPCD.
Mitigation 1-2 - Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (Project)
To minimize the Project's operational impacts on air quality:
. Assure that all residential heating needs are adequately provided by means
other than wood burning appliances.
. If fireplaces are to be provided in more than 1 0 percent of the Project's
residential units, equip those fireplaces with Phase 2 catalytic inserts to
reduce air pollutant emissions.
In addition, incorporate the following into the Project to the maximum extent
feasible:
Residences:
. Link cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets to encourage pedestrian and
bicycle travel;
. Increased street tree planting
. Outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and
tools;
. Use solar water heaters;
. Use built-in energy efficient appliances;
. Use double-paned windows;
. Use energy efficient interior lighting;
. Increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements;
. Use sodium streetlights.
School:
. Increase wall and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements;
. Orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling;
. Shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from
parked vehicles;
. Use sodium parking lot lights;
. Use energy efficient interior lighting.
Mitigation Implementation/Monitoring
1 ) Action to be Taken: Incorporate the above measures into Project
infrastructure plans and residence design.
Resolution No. 3404
Page 13 of 15
2) Entity to Take Action: Project Applicant, through appropriate
representatives (e.g., architect).
3) Timing/Duration: Implement before construction begins.
4) Interested Agencies/Department: City of Arroyo Grande,
SLOAPCD.
The Final EIR identified the following Impact as significant and unavoidable:
Impact D2: The Project would contribute to a significant cumulative traffic
impact at the Brisco Road / U.S. Route 101 interchange which will fall below
LOS C by the year 2005.
The EIR noted that General Plan Policy 8.2(f) provides that when a Project would i
cause the level of service to fall below City standards, that the necessary
improvements should be required either through conditions of approval, development
(impact) fees, or establishment of assessment districts. While the Project does not, by
itself, cause the level of service at the Brisco Road/1 01 interchange to fall below LOS
C, the Project would contribute to the cumulative impact on the intersection.
The Project would contribute traffic impact fees to the City fund used for major
roadway projects identified in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. While the
payment . of such fees may be considered adequate mitigation for a Project's
contribution to the cumulative impacts, this is not so in the present case due to the
planning and funding needed for major interchange improvements.
Requiring the Project applicant to fund the interchange improvements is infeasible, due
to the planning, funding, and engineering considerations for a major interchange
improvement. In addition, the interchange improvements are within the jurisdiction of
Caltrans, making it infeasible for the project applicant to design and construct the
interchange improvements on its own. Caltrans is currently considering changes to the
interchange.
Finding: Although the IIno project" alternative would eliminate the significant impact
on traffic, the social and economic benefits of the Project's inclusion of an elementary
school site make this alternative undesirable and infeasible. Further, the significant
impact 01") traffic is considered acceptable based on a determination that the social and
economic benefits of the Project outweigh the risks of the significant environmental
effects of the Project, as specifically described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
----
~"O"__';'
Resolution No. 3404
Page 14 of 15
ATTACHMENT "B"
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A Draft Environmental Impact "Report (DEIR) was prepared by the City with regard to
the Project, and was circulated for public review. Public hearings were held to receive
public comments, and written comments were received regarding the document. The
City has prepared a Final EIR that responds to each comment. The City Council has
certified the Final EIA.
The Final EIA has identified the following significant and unavoidable environmental
effect that would result from the Project:
Impact 02: The Project would contribute to a significant cumulative traffic
impact at the Brisco Road I U.S. Route 101 interchange which will fall below
LOS C by the year 2005.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEaA Guidelines Section
15093, the City Council hereby adopts and makes the following Statement of
Overriding Considerations regarding the unavoidable impacts of the Project and the
anticipated social, economic, and other benefits of the Project. The Council
specifically finds that each of the overriding considerations set forth below constitutes
a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project
outweigh the significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project, and is an
overriding consideration that justifies and warrants approval of the Project.
OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
Schools play a crucial role in the City of Arroyo Grande. The General Plan identifies
the importance of maintaining a small-town, rural atmosphere, and neighborhood
schools are a critical element in this effort.
The need for a new school is of paramount importance to the City. The presence of a
viable and effective public school system is. essential to the social and economic well-
being of the community, making it possible to attract new businesses to the i:lrea,
contributing to a healthy real estate market, and improving educational opportunities
for the children of the community.
There is abundant evidence in the record that the Lucia Mar Unified School District
has too many students for the available space, and a new school site in the City is
needed. The School District has been' searching for a new school site, and a
committee of school officials and community representatives has, under the authority
of the School Board, been searching for potential school sites in the community.
Despite long and diligent efforts, the committee has been unable to identify a site that
-
Resolution No. 3404
Page 15 of 15
is both feasible, and available. The proposed Project would result in a site being made
available that the District and the State of California has reviewed, and found to be
suitable. In the absence of approval of the Project, the School District may be
unsuccessful in identifying or obtaining any new school site within the City. As a
result, school overcrowding would continue to worsen, as well as the negative impact
such overcrowding has on both the students and the community as a whole.
A school site is especially needed on the east side of U.S. Highway 101. Historic
growth patterns in the City have resulted in a substantial number of students residing
on the east side of U.S. 101, but all school sites are located to the west of U.S. 101.
This results in substantial additional traffic generation, as parents deliver children to
and pick-up children from school, crossing the freeway at the various interchanges,
but primarily at the Brisco Road/101 interchange, which is the subject of Impact D2,
referenced above. Approval of the Project would have the beneficial effect of reducing
vehicle trips on such interchanges, including Brisco Road/101, and by reducing the
number of miles traveled by school buses (and also thereby reducing their impact on
air quality), as students would reside in closer proximity to the school site.
The data to support these overriding factors can be found throughout the record of
proceedings, including the demographic data submitted by the Lucia Mar Unified
School District and in the minutes of the Planning Commission hearings on October 5
and November 2, 1999.
RESOLUTION NO. 3404
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, KEL~ Y WETMORE, Director of Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk of
the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, do
hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that Resolution No. 3404 is a true, full,
and correct copy of said Resolution passed and adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 9th day of November, 1999.
WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 15th
day of November, 1999.
L !m~ZUiJ/LR-- ~
o.
WE ORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI
DEPUTY CITY CLERK