HomeMy WebLinkAbout73-55 - Requesting LAFC to Adopt Sphere of InfluenceRESOLUTION NO. 73-55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA
MESA REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
TO APPROVE AND ADOPT THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE PROPOSED
BY THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, PURSUANT TO THE REQUIRE-
MENTS OF SECTION 54774 CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
THAT, WHEREAS, Section 54774 California Government Code provides
that the Local Agency Formation Commission has as one of its purposes the
development of spheres of influence for local agencies; and
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa desires to have its sphere 4 -of
influence established and approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission;
and
WHEREAS, both the City of Costa Mesa and City of Newport Beach have
heretofore, with the concurrence of the Local Agency Formation Commission,
established certain principles and policies with respect to annexations on
the southerly and easterly boundaries of the City of Costa Mesa; and
WHEREAS, said policy was reduced to writing and entitled "Boundary
Recommendations of the Inter -City Relations Committee of the cities of
Costa Mesa and Newport Beach City Councils;" and
WHEREAS, said boundary recommendations and policies were adopted by
the City of Newport Beach City Council on June 16, 1969 and by the City of
Costa Mesa under Resolution No. 69-43 on June 17, 1969; and
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission partially adopted the
boundary recommendations of the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach by
its Resolution No. 69-110 dated June 25, 1969; and
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa has not deviated from the policies
established by the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach as set forth in
the boundary recommendations of June 16, 1969; and
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission has acknowledged said
policy to the extent of its approval set forth in Resolution No. 69-110 of
the Commission, and to the extent of approving certain detachments from
the City of Newport Beach and annexation to the City of Costa Mesa on the
southerly boundary of the City of Costa Mesa.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that attached to this Resolution and
marked Exhibit "l -A" and by this specific reference made a part hereof, is
a plat setting forth the areas that the City of Costa Mesa considers within
its sphere of influence;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that attached to this Resolution and marked
Exhibit "B" and by this specific reference made a part hereof is a copy of
the boundary recommendations including a plat, which was approved and
adopted by the City of Newport Beach on June 16, 1969, and by the City of
Costa Mesa on June 17, 1969;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that attached to this Resolution marked Exhibit
"C" and by this specific reference made a part hereof is a copy of Resolution
No. 69-110 of the Local Agency Formation Commission adopted June 25, 1969;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Local Agency Formation Commission be
requested to approve and adopt those areas set forth on Exhibit "1-A" as
within the sphere of influence of the City of Costa Mesa;
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Local Agency Formation Commission
be requested to consider the aforesaid areas set forth on Exhibit "l -A"
as within the sphere of influence of the City of Costa Mesa on all future
annexations initiated by any local agency.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of June, 1973.
Mayo 7
the City of Costa Mesa
ATTEST:
dz�
City Clerk of the City of Cos Mesa
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, EILEEN P. PHINNEY, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa and
ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby
certify that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 73-55 was duly and
regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa
Mesa at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held on the 11th day of
June, 1973.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the
Seal of the City of Costa Mesa, this 11th day of ,lune, 1973.
City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of e
City Council of the City of Costa esa
IL3 e n c�
PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL
�+. PUBLIC INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL
----- CITY BOUNDARY
PROPOSEDSTREET
FIRE STATION
L PUBLIC PARK
INDUSTRY
CONDOMINIUM
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
AIRPORT ADDITION
COUNTY LAND
WITHIN SPHERE
BANNING ADDITION
NEWPORT BEACH
ADDITION
■ DEANNEXATION
Exhibit "1-A"
,rr
EhaTJ-IT "B"
BOUNDARY RECO,-' 1ENDATIONS OF THE
INTER -CITY RELATION'S CONS iITTEES OF THE
CITIES OF COSTA MESA AND NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCILS
June 16, 1969
Acting upon the request of the Orange County Local Agency
Formation Commission that the inter -city relations committees of
the Cities of Costa mesa and Newport Beach should meet with the
staff of the LAFC to attempt to determine a mutually satisfactory
solution to the conflicting controversial and overlapping annexa-
tion proposals which have strained relations between the two cities,
the c=ii,ittecs submit the following report and recommendations.
.The joint committees have held a series of meetings, the
latest of which was attended by the Executive Officer of the LAFC.
As a result of these meetings the committees submit the following
proposals as guidelines for the establishment of more logical
present city coundaries. and for future annexations of adjacent un-
incorpor-atcd areas.
These proposals are recommended for joint approval by the
respect:1ve city councils:
1. SOUTHERLY BOUNDARIES BETWEEN THE.SANTA ANA RIFER
AND IRVINE AVENUE
a. That the area Qf Newport Beach southeasterly of
the former Newport Beach City Dump property in the
currently projected Succola subdivision should - be
de -annexed by Newport Beach and annexed to Costa Mesa,
with the proviso that the subdivider agree to dedi-
cate and improve the southerly half of 19th Street
along the northerly line of the tract.
- 2 -
b. That the administrative staffs of the two
cities worm together to establish a common boundary
line along 16th Street, by proposing annexations
and de -annexations, westerly from the intersection
of Pomona Avenue and Superior Avenue, to a point
westerly of Monrovia Avenue, joining the diagonal
boundary between the two cities.
c. That the staffs also work together to develop a
common boundary along Industrial Way and 15th Street
easterly from Superior Avenue to Tustin Avenue.
2. FORMER NEWPORT BEACH CITY DUMP SITE
That the City of Newport Beach consider the de -
annexation of the former City Dump Site after the use
of the area has been established.
3. NORTHE=RLY .%k EA ALONG TUSTIN AVENUE FR0M BAY STREET
TO PALISADES ROAD
The joint committees recognize that various possi-
bilities exi=t.ior a future common boundary in this
area and that more than one can be defended on the
grounds of sound planning principles. The objective
is to select a boundary that is logical in terms of
land use, compatibility of neighborhoods, and the
ultimate rendering of municipal services to the
residents. The expressed preference of petitioners
in the three pending annexations should be taken
into account, but should not control the final deter-
mination of a logical boundary. Examples of alter-
native future boundaries are shown on the accompany-
- 3 -
ing drawing.
It is suggested that the LAFC evaluate the three
pending annexation proposals with particular regard
for the alternative boundaries shown on the accompany-
ing drawing (Exhibit "A"). In so doing various
options become apparent which would require either
the denial or modification of one or more of the
pending proposals. .
a. Northerly of Mesa Drive.
If the east and west Santa Ana Heights neigh-
borhoods should be treated as one community,
Mesa Drive and Santa Ana Avenue become logical
boundaries. If those neighborhoods are logi-
cally separable, then either Tustin Avenue or
the flood control channel become possible
boundaries.
b. Southerly of Mesa Drive.
Tustin Avenue or the rear property lines
westerly thereof appear to represent a more
logical boundary than Santa Ana Avenue. The
precise boundary in relation to Tustin Avenue
should be determined after examination of the
alternatives by the staffs of the two ,cities.
The joint committees recommend that the City Councils
of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach request the LAFC to
evaluate the alternatives and to approve a Holding
4 -
Boundary based on the above considerations;
and further that the two councils agree to
withdraw or adjust pending annexation proposals
as necessary to conform to the Holding Boundary.
For Costa Mesa For Newport Beach
Vice Mayor Robert Wilson Vice Mayor Lindsley Parsons
Councilman Willard T. Jordan Councilman Robert Shelton
i1 < � , •t ,�.. :ate, =�—r �_ � � t
jE �
L �f ^+-_ - 'Tlw I•r—__,•� V 't r' I i'.-.:. .7 I V _ t V ! '. �� �
�^- i ,:n V ---, :_.- 4 •' rte.. a � �1 `
�-y s t« -
rip
j1 7 Ga S1I _-I l li i }V
i'Y 7
i �_:._ y.� it- ,'i f 'r _ i • •' / 1
ait
ka=
1 - w� r �� .oma. -�� y .il �^: �t ��.� L• � -i-'
e �^ Y ���. _ter,:; .,� I •�"F�����-• — // i
fy itll C w jj j{t
r: � :r•' C' iii' � rI: _ � `E :39't,�t �. j _�- ._ � /%
kw
it
4jiii�A��?�� l�___ � ` 1 qI 4` u ' t -�--'� --- �' �rF--- f _ •.. �.' RJ ` I .a � �' _ � i- � � � - !�� ll �' r . �I � 1 �p
-
.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
J
10
11
12
13
14!
a
�JJ
1G
17
18
191
10
21
22
23�
24
25
26
27
28
29
o
s
.� V
01
32
Faso rs
r
EXHIBIT "C"
®a
--r Y:. {rel �'.7 t f: l•-„ r!'--
YEESOM It O __1__� Z•DCAL AGE TC .lam_,
!ib
1_ 1
June 25 1969
On inotion of Allon, duly
tollor:inC Rcsolution i•,,as -:,joDt ed:
� ..ern rte as h •• study � �
r:�`�i�.`:S, this Co�_,..i>,�.zo l has �:t.de 4. �tttCA,� �ur�..Z...tit i�0 G�terr.�j_:e-n-c.
7
I Code Sf etion 54774 of the Kota Beach ci<<`j bo'�Lnrh-(TiG� in
I order to doteriadne the most loSical f-atizro boundary between. the .tiro
cities; and
V'g1T � '%S, said study incluacd a public hca.ring- of this
i
Co.arad s: son on June 25, 10-5) at zrhich represor'catives of the'aforer,:.id _
cit•!cs ana the Concral public presontca infornct:ion and 47.7" -tLc!!2!..'1�,
rcopcU to said boundory.
1101vi, r^Ii 1�,.�� C_�i;, BE IiIir.�01.� r� ;ll thz� t this c: oo
hereby de trer_ni.zc
that the cc ixaoiz boundary bctween the
cities at IIe1 por_ t
1?�',ac.h cit=I CosviA
j'ief5 a shr-11 be
Tustin A-vonuc
bcgiiu1121,,�
of a pc-�knt +�
nor':'--.erly or Twentieth utrcet
Paid extondin
north-urly
to Pa]..i.s:ades Rot:._,
prov_icicd, ho ovcr, that a lorth:resterly of Tustin Avenue and ;outhcrly
of Falisodes Road now
dezignated
as the "Clens
Zone",
south of the Orenr;e
County Aisbort, shall
be excluded
from future
cnncxationo
to cither city.
COIu:�S; r, 1,]:,TDTI . 1`.7,L'�a:, l'iif:I`:I. P. r?{)i.', CiL'�.5, 1'. Pf4r+ItSO:;,
DAVID 14 BUDS fiNOD JAMS T.
IMES: C0 3fiI'SSU011EERU 1;Jar
� 1T1I(`rr.,-{'1 � •.�f •77�. {t7 �T--tit�`1 �,
NONE 7(/��T -�-l�
Ail wL. ti.1 J. allAA: I:IGa. _r .ij A./
CLIA Rti-1 r' S I T , _: +,rTF ♦ -
,
SS,CUIM 0:1 0
7l_1-11"ME
J
I, RICHARD T. r'jr•il; I?, E recuti vo Officer of the local. A ency
Forurf�tion Convi_•s2ion of Cou`ity, Califor'n j hcrcloy that
the above and fore of ng Ra colu tio`l van duly -and rogulcoly t'd0'Jted by
7• at ccti r hwreofi hold � of,
raid Cc�..:.u. , Iio:i �. � a rc��;t.lcs r:� :...,� ��. � .� , o�. tiLo 2J c�_ day
juin, 1969.
IN `:l �'c' I�,Sn �:r�� t ,al',' I have herewito oft ry hand this 25th
of Ju:;e, 1919. `
RIC€7MM T. TUtI<-MM
L•`r_ccutive Offic err of the
Local L30ncy i'Qr�zition
of Oran e Cau-n 4J , California
Resolution No. n L: CJ)lLt e4l �If