The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPH 2 ANNEXATION 145 02-29-88February 29, 1988 ~ 'ln er.-u-om . · HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL $ Ult.] (CT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PROPOSED PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION NO. 145 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Open public hearing. 2. Summarize the determination made by LAFCO's resolution. 3. Receive and file written protests. 4. Accept public testimony. 5. Ask if anyone else wishes to submit a written protest or to withdraw a protest previously filed. 6. Close the public hearing (or continue the public hearing until the next meeting' to preserve the possibility of additional protests, or withdrawal of protests, if the Council so desires). 7. Direct staff to certify' the value of written protests and report back at the City Council's March 7, 1988 meeting or as soon thereafter as possible. 8. Direct staff to draft an appropriate resolution based on percentage of protests certified. BACKGROUND Annexation No. 145 was initiated by the Tustin City Council on October 7, 1987 (Resolution No. 87-106) in response to residents living in the area. on December 2, 1987 the Local Agency Formation Commission approved the annexation subject to the following terms and conditions (LAFCO Resolution No. 87-78). 1. The City of Tustin is designated as the conducting authority and the legislative body thereof is hereby directed to initiate annexation proceedings in compliance with this resolution. 2. Any election called upon the question of confirming an order for annexation shall be called, held and conducted upon such annexation only within the territory ordered to be annexed. 3. The City of Tustin, as applicant, shall be liable for and pay all proper expenses incurred in conducting proceedings in compliance with this resolution. City Council Report February 29, 1988 Annexation No. 145 PROJECT ANALYSIS The proposed Prospect Avenue Annexation No. 145 consists of territory bounded on the north by current City boundary (which is 345 feet southerly of Santa Clara), current City boundary on the west (which is 100 feet westerly of Laurinda Way), and current City boundary on the south (which is 100 feet southerly of.Laurie Lane) and Prospect Avenue on the east. The area is developed with 53 single-family residences. According to the Orange County Registrar's Office there are approximately 123 registered voters in this area with an estimated population of approximate]~Y 201. The Land Use Element of the County General Plan designates the subject territory proposed for annexation for residential use. The Land Use Element of 'the City of Tustin's General Plan also designates the territory for residential use. The zoning for the area-is R-1 (single-family Residential). The Tustin Municipal Code provides, that any territory annexed to the City shall be designated by the zone which the territory was designated under the County Zoning Ordinance, provided that the City has a Zoning District bearing the same designation. Since the City currently has an R-1 zoning designation, no zoning change to this area would be necessary. A full range of municipal services would be extended upon annexation and would include refuse collection, police patrol, park and recreation services, street sweeping (public roads) , fire protection (contract with County Fire Department), street maintenance and general governmental administration. Service levels would be equal to other developed areas of the City and would be provided immediately upon annexation. The annexation territory is within the boundaries of County Service Area No. 5 (CSA 5). CSA 5 is authorized to acquire, develop and maintain local parks; acquire, develop and maintain equestrian trails; to provide road related landscape maintenance and real property services support. There are no local park sites or equestrian trails within the annexation territory. Further, CSA 5 does not provide any road related landscape maintenance within the annexation territory. If the annexation is completed the territory would be administratively removed from CSA 5. .According to recent City Council policy, this area would be excluded from the City's existing bonded indebtedness for parks and civic center. This particular annexation area is within the City of Tustin's sphere of influence which presumes eventual annexation to the City. According to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), the annexation would advance community facilities and consolidate jurisdictional responsibilities which is consistent with State, County and LAFCO policies. A Fiscal Impact Analysis of recent annexation proposals has been completed and is attached for the Council's information. Page 2 City Council .Report February 29, 1988 Annexation No. 145 Upon conclusion of the hearing, the City Council should instruct staff to review and determine the value of the written protests filed and not withdrawn. Not more than 30 days after the protest hearing is closed the City Council would then have to adopt a resolution making a finding regarding the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn, and take one of the following act ions: 1. Terminate proceedings if 50% or more of the registered voters residing in the area have filed and not withdrawn written protests or if 50% or more of the land owners owning land in the area have filed and not withdrawn written protests. 2. Order the change of organization subject to confirmation by the registered voters residing within the affected territory if at least 25% but less than 50% of the registered voters residing in the affected territory have filed and not withdrawn written protests, or at least 25% of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25% of the assessed value of land within the affected territory have filed and not withdrawn written protests. 3. Order the change of organization without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25% of the registered voters or less than 25% of the number of owners .of land owning less than 25% of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. Ma~y Ann.~c~,:berl~in Christine Shingle~n - Associat%Planner Director of Community Development MAC :JGR: se :R: 2/26/88 (422) Attachments: Fiscal Impact Analysis LAFCO Resolution No. 87-77 Map Page 3 FZSCAL ]:HPACT ANA~.YSIS PROPOSED ANNEXATIONS 144, 145, 146 CITY OF TUSTIN OCTOBER, 1987 !. SLI~ARY The City of'Tustin is currently considering the potential annexation of three (3) additional areas, in the North Tustin Area (Annexation No.s 144, i45, and 146) as shown on Figure 1. A fiscal impact analysis has been completed of these annexations in order to project estimated costs and revenues to be encountered by the City. Results of the fiscal impact analysis have revealed the following: Annexation 144 is the major threshold that results in significant additional City costs being incurred due to the cumulative impacts of previously approved annexations and the actual size and location of Annexation 144. 2. 'During fiscal year 1988-89, annual revenue for proposed Annexation 144- is projected at $152,127 and annual costs at $199,178 resulting in a net deficit in fiscal year 1988-89 for the proposed annexations of $47,051 (See Table 2). Revenues over costs realized for fiscal year 1988-89 for Annexation 145 and 146 will result in excess revenues of $959 and $2,918 respectively. . The fiscal impact analysis only has identified actual financial impacts on personnel and operating costs. It is known at this time that capital improvement expenditures are required in annexation areas which could clearly result in substantially larger financial liabilities to the City. . Personnel. vehicle and equipment costs have been prorated, as appropriate to the City's existing operations or to proposed needs in East Tustin. In the case of East Tustin the General Fund will carry the East Tustin's prorated share or balance sooner than would otherwise be the case. I,I. GENERAL IBACKGROU#D INFORilATION General background information on each annexation area evaluated in this fiscal impact report is presented in Table 1. Figure 1 graphically illustrates each annexation area. -1- !1 I L I, OIl& v t dJ'r& N 1": 800' TABLE I NORTH TUSTIN ANNEXATION AREAS SUI~ARY OF GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORHATION 144 145 146 Total acres Total square miles Current population estimate Estimated persons per household Registered voters (prel.) Existing land uses Single Family Office Pre-school Curb miles 1987 - 88 Current Assessed Value 1988 - 89 Projected Assessed Value 160.28 .250 1713 3.8 1209 451 10.3 '. $37,206,662 $37,950,795 16.49 .026 201 3.8 123 53 1.1 $3,664,637 $3,811,222 8.9 .014 68 3.8 43 18 1 1 0.4 $2,335,009 $2,381,709 III. FISCAL IMPACT ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY A. FISCAL IMPACT ASSUMPTIONS The following major assumptions were used in developing the fiscal impact analysis: All revenue estimates are based on the most current population, economic and 1 and use data avai 1 able. The analysis is' presented in constant 1986-1987 dollars with no adjustments for inflation. Costs were directly estimated for City departments. The analysis -does not include actual capital improvement expenditures needed in annexation areas although it is expected that said improvements could represent significant future costs. The analysis looks at the first possible full fiscal year after which the annexations would be completed for determining costs and revenues. B. lqLri'HODOLOG¥ The following discussion defines estimation methodologies used in projecting various City revenues and costs resulting f~om annexation of the study area. REVENUES Propert7 Tax Under the Master Property Tax Transfer Agreement, the City receives approximately 45~ of the County share and the share of' affected special districts. Tustin's share of the basic levy under this Agreemept would be approximately 13Z. Property Transfer Tax The City receives an allocation of $.55 per 1,000 valuation of property sold, excluding the original equity on property and existing financing assumed by a buyer. A .10 turnover'rate is assumed with an .80 consideration rate for equity and financing. Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $28.89 per capita -2- C ~ ~jarette Tax $1.50 per capita plus a $400 base Gas Tax Section 2106 - $4.56 per capita Section 2107 - $8.54 per capita Vehicle Code Ftnes .~+ ~$3.76 per capita Municipal Fines $.62 per capita Communtt7 Development (Building and Plan Check) fees Revenue estimates assume that the majority of single family homes are at least 20 years old and .05 of these units will be reroofed per year as deferred maintenance. The average permit for a reroof is $60. It is also assumed that .01 of total single family units will see interior or exterior remodeling per year at a ratio of 755 major remodels and 25~ minor remodels. Valuations of each of these improvement types is an . average of $25,000 and $10,000 respectfully. These valuations were then applied against the City's current plan check and building permit fee schedules. Ho~ners Propert7 Tax Relief .0276 multiplier times total property tax Interest 2.5% of all projected recurring revenues . cos'rs Pol t ce Oepartmen~ Police Department costs were directly estimated based on personnel and operational needs for Annexation Area 144. It has been determined that Annexation Area's 145 and 146 will have no impact on the Police Department. -3- · TABLE 2 CITY OF TUSTI# A DETAIL OF COST/REVENUE PROOECTIO#S FOR ANNEXATIONS FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 Recur~in~ Revenues Property tax Property tax transfer Hotor Vehtcle In-lieu Ct garette tax Gas tax Vehtcle code fines Municipal fines Community Development (Bldg & plan check) fees Homeowner' s property tax rellef Interest 144 145 ~m~ 49,277 4,955* 1,668 168 49,489 5,807 2,970 7O2 22,44O 2,634 6,441 756 5,670 230 10,462 1,052 3,710 408 To~al Revenues 146 Tota I s Recu~lng Costs,,, Pollce -,rsonflel erattng 3,096 57,328 105 1,941 1,965 57,261 502 4,174 890 25,964 226 7,423 42 5,942 Publtc Works (1) Personnel Operating Subtotal 657 12,171 187 4,305 16,712" 7,670 176,509 Subtotal 40,000 2,000 Fire contract (2) Liability insurance 42,000 13,695 53,650 67,345 79,555 10,278 5,755 2,135 61,540 5,755 2,135 61,540 8,792 375 88,722 1,206 408 l 1,892 Subtotal 89,B33 9,998 TOTAL COSTS 199,178 15,753 (-47,051) 959 Difference between Recurring Revenue/Costs (1) 783 100,614 2,918 217,849 4,752 (-41,340) All figures are shown in 1987-88 dollars. (1) Please note that actual financial costs can be determined at this time only for operations and personnel. It is known that-significant capital improvements are required that could result in larger financial liabilities. Public Works Department Public Works costs 'are estimated for four major line divisions that would be service i~acted by proposed annexations - Streets, Trees, Vehicles. Increases in operational costs for each of these divisions was estimated based on the relationship of curb miles to be added by the annexations to total City curb miles (11.8/150.2 = .079%). This percentage was then applied against total estimated line division operational costs projected for each division in the fiscal year 1987-88 budget. Personnel and capital vehicle and equipment costs were directly estimated based on input from the Public Works Department. However, it was assured that personnel and capital costs for street sweeping could be prorated for use in the East Tustin development at a rate of 15% to annexation area 144. It was assumed that street' sweeping to annexations 145 a~d 146 could be absorbed into the current operation. While it is difficult to determine tha actual costs of capital i~rovement that will be required in Annexation Area 144, the Public Works Department has identified needed capital i~rovement areas for street maintenance that will eventually be required at 'significant cost including: A.C. overlays on streets - About 75% of the streets will require an A.C. overlay within the next 3-5 years; routine slurry seals will be needed on the remaining streets. ° Sidewalks - About 35% of the streets do not have sidewalks. Stret Lights - About 30% of the streets do not have street 1 i gh ti rig. Major street widening improvements are deficient on: West side of Yorba Street between Santa Clara and Fairhaven Avenues East side of Yorba Street between Rainier and Fairhaven Avenues West side of Prospect Avenue between Santa Clara and Fairhaven Avenues All roads within Area 145 have been recently overlayed and should pose no major problems for the next ten years. Laurinda Way in Area 146 will require an A.C. overlay within the next three years. Street lights are non-existent in either Area 145 or 146. Annexation Area No. 145 also does not contain any sidewalks. -4- Ftre Increases Since 1978 Tusttn has recetved ftre protection and suppression servtces through the Orange County Ftre 01strict. Ftre protection · costs to contracting clttes are based on an allocation of the Fire 01strtct budget. Removtng certain untque expenditures, an adjusted total ts allocated to each contracting city based on assessed valuation of t~provements and unsecured valuation, number of calls for servtce tn preceding year., population and area tn square mtles. It ts assumed that structural fire protection costs per Capita.will be approximately $29.87, $6[4 costs per mtllton of assessed valuation and $22,[86 per square mtle served, along wtth a t ncrease tn the base rate due to current labor negotiations unde~ay at the County. The Ctty's projected Increases In fire contract costs are expected to be the worse case. Liability Insurance Assumes an increase of $6 per capita. 1988-89 FISCAL ~PACTS Table 2 Indicates estimated revenue and costs'.fOr annexation areas during Fiscal Year 1988-89. ,nual revenues for Annexation Area 144 are projected at $152,127 and annual costs are projected at $199,[78, resulting tn a deftctt between revenues tn 1988-89 of $47,051. As noted earlier, however, it is known that significant capital improvements are required that could, depending on scheduling, result in larger financial 11abilities on the City over time. Annual revenues for Annexation Areas [45 and [46 are projected at $[6,712 and $7,670 respectively and annual costs at $[5,753 and $2,9[8 resultJng tn excess of revenues for Annexation Area [45 of $959 for Annexation [4'6 $2,9[8. CAS: pef -5- RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA December 2, 1987 On motion of Comissioner Holt , duly seconded and carried, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, a resolution for the 'proposed annexation designated Prospect Avenue Annexation No. 145 to the City of Tustin in the County of Orange was heretofore filed by the City of Tustin and accepted for filing October 16, 1987 by the Executive Officer of this Local Agency Formation Commission pursuant to Part 3 of Title 5, Division 3, commencing with Section 56000 et seq of the Government Code; WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56828 set December 2, 1987 as the hearing date of this proposal and gave the required notice of hearing; and WHEREAS, the 'Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56833, has reviewed this proposal and prepared a report including his recommendation th .... ~on, and has furnished a copy of this report to each person entitled to a copy; WHEREAS,. this Commission called this proposal fo'r public hearing on December 2, 1987, heard from the interested parties, considered the proposal and the report of the Executive Officer, and considered the factors determined, by the Commission to be relevant to this proposal, including, but not limited to, factors specified in Government Code Section 56841 ;. and WHEREAS, the city of Tustin, as lead agency, determined the proposed annexation to be ca,tegorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. NOW, THEREFORE, the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of Orange DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE and ORDER as follows: Section t. Subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter specified, said proposal is approved. Section 2. The boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed to the City of Tustin are specifically described in the legal . description attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Said territory is found to be inhabited and is assigned the following short-form designation' PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION NO. 145 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN. Resolution No. 87- 78 · Section 3.' The City of Tustin is designated as the conducting authority and the legislative body thereof is hereby directed to initiate annexation proceedings in compliance with this resolution. Section 4. Any election called upon the question of confirming an order for annexation shall be called, held and conducted upon such annexation only within the territory ordered to be annexed. Section 5. The City of Tustin, as applicant, shall be liable for and pay all proper expenses incurred in conducting proceedings in compliance wi th this resolution. Section 6. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized and directed to mail certified copies of this resolution in the manner as provided in Section 56853 of the Government Code. AYES: COMMISSIONERS DONALD A. HOLT, JR., EVELYN HART, ROGER R. STANTON GADDI H. VAS'QUEZ AND PHI'LLIP R. SCHWARTZE NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE ~ IT: COMMISSIONERS NONE S~ATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE I, RICHARD T. TURNER, Executive Officer .of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by said Commission at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 2nd day of December, 1987. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 2nd day of December, 1987. RICHARD T. TURNER Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California c~retary Resolution No. 87-78 e 1 2 3 ,4 ~" 6 7 § 13 14 25 27 BLOCK 5852 MODULES ~2, 52 EXIIIBIT "A" PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION N'O. 145 TO TIIE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ALL OF TRACT NO. 1900 AND TRACT NO. 2708 IN TIIE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY OF TIlE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CAI..IFORNIA, AS PER .MAP RECORDED IN BOOK .-. .53, PACES 15 AND 16, AND PER MAP RECORDED IN' BOOK 90 P~CE 25, RESPECTIVE- I,Y, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID 0RANGE COUNTY MORE PARTICU- LARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ,, BEGINNING AT AN ANGLE POINT IN TIlE EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY LINE OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN AS PER "PROSPECT-CARLSBAD ANNEXATION NO. 75" TO SAID CITY SAID ANCLE POINT BEING TIlE SOUTIIEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 1900, SAID POINT BEING ON TIlE CENTERLINE OF PROSPECT AVENUE (NORTII) (70.00 FEET WIDE) BEING TIlE DISTANT NORTH 03° 29' 15" EAST 1311.75 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF TIIE CENTERLINES OF 17Til STREET .(100.00 FEET WIDE) AND PROSPECT AVENUE (NORTII) (70.00 FEET WIDE); TIIENCE NORTll 89° 53' 55" WEST ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG TIlE SOUTIIERLY LINE OF SAID' TRACT NO. 1900 A DISTANCE OF 704.42 FEET TO TIlE SOUTIIWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 19OO AND TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN PER SAID "PROSPECT-CARLSBAD ANNEXATION NO. 725" TO SAID CITY, BY TIlE "MALENA DRIVE ANNEXATION" TO SAID CITY AND BY TIlE "YORBA STREET ANNEXATION NO. 2" TO SAID CITY; · TIIENCE NORTII O0° O1' 45" WEST ALONC SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO. 1900 A DISTANCE OF $94.37 FEET TO TIlE NORTIIWEST CORNER OF SAID TRA~r NO. 1900 AND TO AN ANGLE POINT IN TIIE EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE OF TIIE CITY OF TUSTIN PER SAID "YORBA STREET ANNEXATION NO. 2" TO ,.S~D C!TY,.SAID POINT AIoSO BEING ON TIlE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 270fl AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 90, PAGE 25 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; TIIENCE NORTH 89° 53' 55" WEST ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG TIlE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 270§ A DISTANCE OF 0.75 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 27Ofl AND TO AN ANGLE t'O~NT IN Tile PAGE 1 OF 3 1 2 3 4 5" 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 :32 BLOCK 5852 MODULES 42, 52 EXIiIBIT "A" PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION NO. 145 TO TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN, CAI.IFORNIA EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN PER SAID "YORBA STREET ANNEXATION NO. 2" TO SAID CITY; TIIENCE NORTI{ O0° 04' 57" WEST,ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY I.INE AND ALONG TIIE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TIZAC~ NO. 2708 A DISTANCE OF 383.14 FEET TO Tile NORTI~EST CORNER OF SAID TRACT NO. 2708 AND TO AN ANGLE POINT IN TIIE EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN PER SAID "YORBA STREET ANNEXATION NO. 2" TO SAID CITY; TIIENCE SOUTII 89~ 53' 55" EAST ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG TIlE NORTIlERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 2708 A DISTANCE OF 1.14 FEET TO TIlE SOUTIIWEST CORNER OF TIlE "REVISED SANTA CLARA ANNEXATION" TO SAIl) CITY; TIIENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE AND ALONG SAID NORTIIERLY LINE SOUTI! 89° 53' 55" EAST A DISTANCE OF 724.38 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN Tile EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE OF TIIE CITY OF TUSTIN PER SAID "REVISED SANTA CLARA ANNEXATION" TO SAID CITY; TIIENCE DEPARTING FROM SAID EXISTING-BOUNDARY LINE SOUTII 89° 53' 55" EAST ~LONC TIlE NORTIIERLY LINE OE SAID TRACT NO. 2708 A DISTANCE OF 40.07 FEET TO TIIE CENTERLINE OF PROSPECT AVENUE (NORTII) (70.00 FEET WIDE) BEING · DISTANT SOUTIi 03° 29' 15" WEST 345.35 FEET FROM TilE INTERSECTION OF TIIE CENTERLINES oF SANTA CLARA AVENUE (50.00 FEET WIDE) AND PROSPECT AVENUE . (NORT!I) (70.00 FEET WIDE); TIIENCE SOUTll 03° 29' 15" WEST ALONG TIlE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT NO. 2708 AND ALONG TII~.~ENTERLINE OF PROSPECT AVENUE (NORTIi) (70.00 FEET WIDE) A DISTANCE OF 979.22 FEET TO TIlE POINT OF BECINNINC. CONTAINING 16.49 ACRES. ATTACIIED AND MADE A PART OF, IS A MAP DESICNATED AS ~XIIIBIT "B". PAGE 2 OF 3 ! 1 2 3 4 ~'° 0 13 14 15 18 17 18 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 2~ 27 28 29 30 31 32 BLOCK 5852 HODULE 42, 52 EXIIIBIT "A" PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION NO. 145 TO TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA TIlIS PROPOSAL DOES HEET Tile APPROVAL OF TIlE OIL~NCE COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OFFICE. C.R. NELSON, COUR~ SURVEYOR ] PUTY ~OI~T¥"gURVEYOR DATE v t - ~-~_~' PREPARED BY: K.W. LAN~uER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 2832 WALNUT AVENUE, SUITE A TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 (714) 730-0401 ANNA H. BEAL, L.S. 4955 RECISTRATION 'EXPIRATION DATE: 12-31-89 165-01-145 JANUARY 5, 1988 PACE 3 OF 3 TO T~4f. ~:ITT Gl: TUSTIH $ I~1. Tg. NO ZlOI 'fit. MO t~gl- , 14 II' 51' $$"W ii' N'W t.~ (gqN[it- W'LY ]lOUU OJitY- T~. )40. lliOO. TUSTIN iQUNOAflY LINE. \, Tit. NO. 1100 TO rUE CiTY or TU)TIN 8QUNDAGT LINE. :' : ~'. L' ', ;.'..d,'.'.':")' . .. : :...'..,. :',..... ...., ,:::';:~.'~/ %:'.'/. /.. . // / ./ · LAURIr ,~ LANE 1 104.41' -S'LY LINE 'TR. NO. 1100 PitOSFiCr- CADLSgAO ANN(/,. BOUNDARY LINt. C:i".i/:..i:"?i:':';'.i".:: i:':ii..:'.'.:.:':ii:~.:.'. ~';. .. LANE ' I ST~i[T U'[LY COgN(~ NO. 1108 C'LY 8OUNOaVt T~. NO. ZlOl - ~['LY 6OU~O/,RY TR. ~O. IqO0 PROS_P._.E.C ..... Av...EN.._UE... AN IE_XA, T...I..O_.N... NO. ~. 145 Tills PcPOIUSAL DOES Milt 11~( t ' APPIIOVAL 0f TNt OIANG! COUNTY C.R. ~I~AN,dTY SURVltO~ SCALE: I"= lO0' I i I EXISTi~ CiTY OF TUSTIN DOUN~ARY __--_ -- ,- ANNEXATION BOUNDARY ANNA M. 8[AL. L.$. 4%5 [XPIR(5t7 -11-'99 Pfl[PARfO BY: 26$z WALNUT AYINU[, SUIT( a TUSTIN, CALIF OIINIA ~J2&go [114) 710'0401 15.49 ACRES