HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 3 ANNEXATION 107 05-05-80DATE:
May 5, 1980
CONSENT CAr.~.NDAR
No. 3, 5-5-80-
Inter-eom
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Council
R. K. Fleagle, Community Development Consultant
Annexation No. 107 Proposal (Browning-Mitchell- Red Hill)
Letters were mailed to the registered voters and property owners in
the Browning-Mitchell-Red Hill county island area, requesting their
opinions pertaining to the proposed annexation. Of the 405 letters
that were mailed, 21 letters to property owners and 55 letters to
the registered voters were returned as not deliverable and were unable
to be forwarded. In these instances, an envelope was readdressed to
the "resident/owner" to assure full opportunity for expression of
opinions.
Four letters and seven telephone calls were received in support of the
annexation. One letter and three telephone calls were in opposing.
By the tone of the letters, the strength of support is much greater than
the basis of protest, as indicated by the attached examples.
This proposed annexation was approved by the Local Agency Formation
Commission in March, 1978, but denied by the Board of Supervisors
on the basis of a lack of public support. On the basis of the
evaluation of responses received, it is believed that the proposed
annexation would now receive overwhelming support and could be pro-
cessed as an island annexation with the Board of Supervisors being
the conducting authority.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Recommend that Resolution No. 80~0be adopted to recommence annexation
proceedings for Annexation No. 1~7 and the Finance Director be author-
ized to issue a check for necessary filing in the amount of $500.00.
KF:ss
April lOp 1980
Dear Resident:
Once again there is a desire by several residents within your area
to be included within the city of Tusfin. This time the results of
annexaf'ion are dirferenf, since there is no additional cost fo the
resident and property owner fo reside in the city. However, before
proceeding with this annexation request, we desire fo know your opin-
ions and desires in this matter.
As a result of Proposition 13, annexation fo the city of Tustln will
n~t increase your taxes, and will probably result in a reduction in
¥~gr total living costs since there is no charge for curbsJde refuse
service to city residents. Additional financial advantages may
accrue to you if proposed service changes are levied by the county.
C:ner advantages of city residence include the services of the city
ps~ice department, weekly street sweeping, recreaffon services, and
opportunity to hav'e a voice and vote in determining the policies
the City and selecting your local government representatives.
As shown on the attached map, your area is a logical extension of the
b~undaries of the city of Tusfin and the City Council has agreed to
eccept annexation of residential areas to the city with the consent
o~ the residents. Property owners in other sections of the city,
such as San Juan and the Briarcliff development on Main Street, have
determined that annexation to Tusfin would be in their best interest
end the City Council has approved their request.
If you desire additional information or object to this annexation
proposal, please call the Cc~unity Development Department, 544-8890
or send us a letter expressing your sentiments. Your desires are
earnestly solicited.
Sincerely yours,
R. Kenneth Fleagle, D.P.A.
Cornmuni fy Development Consul tanf
attachment
City Center 300 Centennial TustLn, California 92680 (714) 544-8890
April 18, 1980
Barbara M. Chilcott
1881-68 Mitchell Avenue
Tustin, California 92680
Mr. Ro Kenneth Fleagle, D.P.A.
Community Development Consultant
City of Tustin
City Center
300 Centennial
Tustin, California 92680
Dear Mr. Fleagle:
Thank you for your letter of'April 10, 1980, informing me
of the POssibility of annexation.
I strongly support annexation and look forward to becoming
a citizen of the City of Tustin. If there is anything I
can do to assist this effort, please contact me. My
telephone number during business hours is (714) 837-6050.
Sincerely,
~'b~z'a M. Chilcott
1
2
3
4
6
?
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3O
31
~2
RESOLUTION NO. 80-4o
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF TUSTIN,
California, Requesting the Recommencement of Proceedings for
the Annexation of Certain Inhabited Territory Designated as
"Browning-Mitchell-Red Hill Annexation No. 107" to the City
of Tustin.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Tustin on behalf of residents within
a certain inhabited area constituting an unincorporated island bounded
by Red Hill, Mitchell and Browning Avenues consents to the annexation
of said properties into the city; and
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation was determined to be categorically
exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act for environmental impact review by notice filed on January 4, 1978;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Tustin is willing to extend the full range
of municipal services to the properties within said unincorporated
island; and
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission on March 8, 1978,
found that the proposed annexation was within Tustin's Sphere of In-
fluence and met all of the criteria required by Section 35150 (f) of
the Municipal Organization Act;
~HEREAS, the Board of Supervisors did not favorably act upon the
proposed annexation in 1978 due to a lack of public support, which
appears to be now present;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Tustin,
California:
That the City of Tustin requests the recommencement
of annexation proceedings in connection with said
inhabited territory in accordance with the Municipal
Organization Act of 1977 governing unincorporated islands.
That said unincorporated territory be, and hereby is,
designated as the "Browning-Mitchell-Red Hill Annexation
No. 107" to the City of Tustin and is as shown on Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this re-
ference, and as legally described in Exhibit "B" attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
That the proposed annexation is made pursuant to Sections
35013 and 35150 (f) of the Municipal Organization Act of
1977.
That the subject area is a totally developed urbanized
area of 51.00 acres consisting of apartments, condominiums,
and fourplex units. The area is totally surrounded by the
incorporated limits of the City of Tustin.
That the justification for the proposed change of organi-
zation is to provide full municipal services to an urbani-
zed County island area that is remote from County service
facilities and thereby increase the economy and efficiency
of urban services.
!
2
5
6
?
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
~0 J
80
o
o
That the Local Agency Formation Commission is hereby
petitioned to determine pursuant to Section 35150 (f)
of the Municipal Organization Act of 1977 that the
proposed area:
a. Does not exceed 100 acres in area...
b. That subject area constitutes the
entire island.
c. That subject area is totally surrounded
by the City of Tustin.
d. That subject area is not prime agricul-
tural land.
e. That subject area is fully developed.
f. That subject area will benefit from such
annexation, and following notice and
hearing, authorize the Board of Supervisors
of Orange County to order the annexation of
the subject territory without an election.
That the City Clerk shall certify the adoption of the
Resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council,
City of Tustin, California, held on the day of
1980.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk