Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPHERE OF INFLUENCE MAP 19871111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 *NEW FILE* SPHERE OF INFLUENCE MAP Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner MEMO DATE: 9/3/87 DEPT/DIST: City of Newport Beach FROM: Richard T. Turner, Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission SUBJECT: City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Map Per your request of August 31, 1987, submitted is the subject item. Please call me if I can be of any further assistance. RTT: W CdLL q�s„� �i1/��ivcrJy Z34a ® F 880-124.2 r RICHARD T. TURNER VMCUTIVC O"ICIM LOCAL AOtKY FONMATKM COMMB!IGN CAOCK[M HANK BUILDING 1700 N MAIN ST11MM SUITK 915 SAWA ANA, CALNOMMA Wi9O1 .- PNDNK (IM) Si4-Ra" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA July 27, 1983 On motion of Commissioner Jarrell, duly seconded and carried. the foll resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Section 54774 of the California Government Code mandates the Loca' Agency Formation Commission to develop and determine spheres of influence for each local governmental agency within the county; and WHEREAS, this Local Agency Formation Commission did approve a sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach by Resolution No. 73-1451 adopted September 12, 1973, Resolution No. 74-100, adopted August 14, 19740 and Resolution No. 80-730 adopted August 27, 1980; and WHEREAS, Section 54774 of the California Government Code requires the Loca' Agency Formation Commission shall periodically review and update the spheres of influence developed and determined by 1t% and WHEREAS, this Local Agency Formation Commission on June 23, 19820 directed staff to continue scheduling periodic reviews of city spheres of influence. WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 54774 set July 27. 1983, to review said city of Newport Beach sphere of influence. WHEREAS. this Commission did review a map and report prepared by staff. NOW. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that this Commission revises the established sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach to include the Beeco property and reaffirms the balance of the sphere of influence as determined by Resolutions Nos. 73-145. 74-100 and 80-73. AYES: COMMISSIONERS JAMES T. JARRELL, ROBERT E. DWYER, AND DONALD J. SALTARELLI. NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE. ABSENTS COMMISSIONERS HARRIETT M. WIEDER AND ROGER R. STANTON. STATE 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 thereofs held on the 27th day of July. 1983. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 27th day of July. RICHARD T. TURNER Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California Resolution No. 83-48 acre ry '*, I. K Ire V, • iVr. Nay. IRVINE Ajpnm B. fig �r•h— f �ooc.raa ^•A ./ � �."�°4�`�O©Q(,� �q r�..r _ T p�s7 Y i w j, c�a1i �. , «•- .twi .ry it :•���, . i� ' n.., ^ :. -.. `; '. ,: �..'."..':. `' � 1' ,- .• • �� . •;rR n �:....,...... .-.,r'",.Crr: i �•a. ^'i'Ti: r?r;!Tir:eti?.:'.� '�.� of ' _' "» "":' !�vr'°'iP�%j'.!.�fY "':''r�t?,✓�.f` N','.'S^....�rr::f w.'...-v- �.%«ki.a v.«.«-��i.., .• .. �. .......,;•,•-'-•--•- .... , w� .•. yFi .A r :',rs :i'•r�"a'l:�L. ty••.F�.: �, .,� q ,Y •1�C� ::.'E��•y' �.�^.. .,,4�y,:'�:`.•�i;.,,::.� ..:'4.:., .r •r. a., t :� ..dir:FL iiY..`!a+-i.L�SaeraGBkmu'tGt..'.i'.�.ti,:uru'iis.fia2:.+u�rk.`Y.w...'S'.c:iJi?it�c.i.1....�..•�.;.,:,w�IS'i....4itS4�..'a�ip�LtiSa+A�i3Y'.:aaii5u's�adLn��:.._�•.a7ci L'Irk.'.�441:&'.'..Y. NEWPORT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BEACH EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY ADJACENT CITIES S . 0 . I . MMUFAMEW ADOPTED 9 / 12 / 73 (Ist.partial) NEW MAP 10/15/77 SHEETS ADOPTED II / 28 / 73 (2nd partial) E AMENDED 8 / 14 / 74 ( TUSTIN AV.) scale 1:3,000 REVISED 8 /27/ 80 i --r Jam- ' IRVINE o� I � 1 1 <� 6 F i NEWPORT BEACH . I I 'LAGUNA 1 ;BEACH (Deleted May 13', 19$1); 'i(t(fir k'ctc . wt ----------------- al EX_ _,e•:.-Lam:,:, a:^,.r ;,:.rc--r^,..•---_ -- _ ..-- --_..; :..--. ... - _ : ---- r.... --- - -.- -- a':-_....: .,-...,. —__ ..f NEWPORT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BEACH EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY ADJACENT CITIES S.O.I. i ADOPTED 9 / 12 / 73 (Ist. partial) NEW MAP 10/ 13/77 SHEETS ADOPTED II / 28 / 73 (2nd partial] AMENDED 8 / 14 / 74 ( TUSTIN AV.) Elm scale 1:31000 AMENDED 9 / 8 / 76 (COASTAL AREA) —� ` 1200 N. MAIN STREET, SUITE 215 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 TELEPVGNE-,M4) 834-2239 Local Agency Formation Commission 0 7. October 2, 1987 CHAIRMAN PHILLIP R. SCHWARTZE COUNCILMAN CITY SAN OANCAPISTRANO Bret B. Bernard, Associate Planner VICE-CHAIRMAN City of Newport Beach, Planning Department DONALD A. HOLT, JR. Post Office Box 1768 REPRESENTATIVE OF Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 GENERAL PUBLIC EVELYN R. HART Re: Sphere of Influence for City of Newport Beach COUNCILWOMAN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Dear Mr. Bernard: ROGER R. STANTON SUPERVISOR As a follow-up to our telephone conversation on September 30, FIRST DISTRICT 1987, submitted is additional information regarding the inclusion GADIVASOUEZ of the Beeco property to the City of Newport Beach's Sphere of SUPERVISOR THIRD DISTRICT Influence. ALTERNATE RONALD B. HOESTEREY By submitting my staff report on the Review and Update of the City COUNCILMAN of Newport Beach sphere of influence, this may give you a better CITY OFTUSTIN understanding of the events that have taken place over the past ALTERNATE DAVID BORAH years. REPRESENTATIVE OF GENERAL PUBLIC I apologize for the outdated map I sent that does not give the ALTERNATE true picture of the status of the Banning (Beeco) property. THOMAS F. RILEY SUPEFIFTHDISTRICTIf you have any further questions, please call me at 834-2072. RICHARD T. TURNER EXECUTIVE OFFICER Very trulyyours,� 4 Richard T. Turner Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission RTT:mj attachment July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission County Hall of Administration Santa Ana, California 92701 Ladies and Gentlemen: RE Review and Update of City of Newport Beach's Sphere of Influence By minute order dated June 8, 1983, your commission scheduled today for the public hearing to review and update the city of .Newport Beach's sphere of influence. LEGAL AUTHORITY California Government Code Section 54774 mandates: In order to carry out its purposes and responsibilities for planning and shping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local governmental agencies so as to advantageously provide for the present and future needs of the county and its communities, the local agency formation commission shall develop and determine the sphere of influence of each local governmental agency within the county. As used in this section, "sphere of influence" :.'. means a plan for the probable ultimate physical boundaries and service area of a local governmental agency. Upon determination of a sphere of influence the commission shall adopt -sach•sphere=and- shall periodical-iy _review and Y` ate:tfie adgpted-sphere. HISTORY By Resolution No. 73-145, passed September 12, 1973, LAFCO determined a partial sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach. The unincorporated territory designated within that sphere of influence were the easterly half of the Santa Ana River channel described as "Area No. i" on the attached Exhibit A, the "County Triangle" (Area No. 3) and the Santa Ana Heights (Area No. 5) also identified on Exhibit a. In November, 1973, LAFCO considered designating the Beeco property (Area No. 2) within the Newport Beach sphere of influence. The Beeco property was completely surrounded by the city limits as a result of an annexation completed in 1950. July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of Citgnof Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 2 Newport Beach supported the inclusion of the Beeco property within its sphere of •influence. The landowner, Beeco, Ltd., opposed inclusion in any sphere of 'influence because the property was in use for oil production which was not a permitted use in Newport Beach at the time. By a majority vote, LAFCO rejected the inclusion of the Beeco property within the Newport Beach sphere. At the request of certain residents within the Bay Knolls' tract, identified as Area No. 4 on the attached Exhibit A, LAFCO reviewed the established spheres of influence for the cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa along the Irvine/Tustin Avenues corridor. Earlier, LAFCO had included Bay Knolls within the sphere of influence for the city of Costa Mesa. The residents preferred to be within the Newport Beach sphere of influence and stated they would annex to Newport Beach if their area was placed in Newport Beach's sphere. By Resolution No. 74-100, passed August 14, 1974, LAFCO, by a majority vote, amended the respective spheres of influence of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach to designate the Bay Knolls' tracts within the Ne{aport Beach sphere of influence. In September, 1976, LAFCO determined the spheres of influence for the cities of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach within the Irvine Coastal area (Area No. 6, Exhibit B). The commission rejected the city of Irvine's bid to include any of this area within its sphere of influence. LAFCO determined the area westerly of Muddy Canyon was within the Newport Beach sphere of influence south of the ridge - line of the San Joaquin mills. The territory easterly of Muddy Canyon was placed in Laguna Beach's sphere. The latter was deleted from the Laguna Beach sphere of influence in May, 1981 following LAFCO's review and update of the Laguna Beach sphere of influence. ' LAFCO reviewed the spheres of influence of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa in August, 1980. At that time staff reminded LAFCO that it had revised the Newport Beach and Costa Mesa spheres of influence in 1974 at the i;equest of certain residents within the Bay Knolls' tracts because these residents had indicated an interest in annexing to Newport Beach. However, following LAFCO's action to amend the spheres of influence and to approve a subsequent annexation to Newport Beach the residents did not complete the annexation because the city required, as a condition of annexation, the area participate in a municipal assessment district to improve the area's drainage, which the residents refused to do. Staff supported the transfer back of the Bay Knolls tracts to Costa Mesa. By Resolution No. 80-73 your commission revised the common sphere of influence line for the cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa along the alignment of Tustin and Irvine Avenues south of John Wayne Airport. Area No. 4 (Bay Knolls) was determined to be within the city of Costa Mesa's sphere of influence. LOCATION The boundaries of the Newport Beach sphere of influence are generally described as the centerline of the Santa Ana River on the west, the city limits of Costa Mesa and the Costa Mesa sphere of influence on the northwest, the city limits of Irvine and John Wayne Airport on the north, the ridgeline of the San Joaquin Hills and Muddy Canyon.on'the east, and the Pacific Ocean on the south as illustrated on the attached Exhibits 0 and B. 1 .. July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 3 FINDINGS Section 54774 of the Government Code specifies the factors which must be considered by the commission when determining the spheres of influence of local governmental agencies. Section 54774 further requires a•written statement of Y findings with respect to each of these factors. For your review and acceptance these factors are presented as follows: i The maximum possible ^service area of the agency based upon present and The city of Newport Beach is located within the urbanized central section of Orange County. The city of Huntington Beach is located westerly of Newport Beach across the Santa Ana River channel. The cities of Costa Mesa and Irvine border Newport Beach on the north. The Pacific Ocean is on the south. Separating the cities of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach is the only large undeveloped land known as the Irvine Coastal Area (Area No. 6). The expansion of Newporf Beach is limited to certain county islands on the north and west and the -Irvine Coast on thereast, Areas No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. By Resolution No. 80-33, LAFCO approved the annexation of the County Triangle (Area No. 3) to the city of Newport Beach. Annexation proceedings had been initiated by the city pursuant to the special "island" annexation procedure within the Municipal Organization Act of 1977 (MORGA). .Annexation proceedings were completed in November, 1980. Area No. 4 (Bay Knolls) was determined by LAFCO Resolution No. 74=100 to be within the city of Costa Mesa's sphere of influence. Area No. 1 is the easterly half of the Santa Ana River Channel. The property is owned by the Orange County Flood Contrdl District which uses the territory for flood control purposes. Area No. 2 is the Beeco property. It is currently used for oil production. Several land use proposals have been considered by Newport Beach, but the ultimate land use has not been decided. It is expected the ultimate development will be a mixture of land uses including residential and commercial uses. Although surrounded by the city limits of Newport Beach and precluded from annexing to any other city by state law ,'the Beeco property has been excluded from the Newport Beach sphere of influence because of the landowner's wishes. Certain residents and landowners within Santa Ana Heighis (Area No. 5) have expressed intergst in annexing to Newport Beach and are presently discussing e future zoning of the area if annexation were to occur with the city. Newport Beach is also discussing the exchange of property tax revenues that would occur if annexation occurred with the County of Orange in accordance with Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99 (b). Annexation of the Santa Ana He4ghts area is complicated by the presence and operations of John Wayne July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 4 Airport, particularly in regards to noise and traffic. Beir�ause of the unique nature of the airport and its ownership by the County of Orange LAFCO has not considered the inclusion of the airport in any city's sphere of influence. T The airport is contiguous to three cities: Costa Mesa, Irvine and Newport Beach. Area No. 6 (the Irvine Coast) has been the subject of much planning study in recent years. Until the ultimate land use decisions are made annexation of the Irvine Coast is not expected. The range of services the agency is providing or could provide. The city of Newport Beach is a full service municipal corporation. The city provides the following major urban service- sewer, water, police, fire, library, park and recreation, street lighting; trash collection and street sweeping. All services are financed by general revenues and user fees. C. The projected future population growth of the area. Area 1 (Santa Ana River), Area 2 (Beeco) and Area 6 (Irvine Coast) are uninhabited. There are no development plans for Areas 1 and 6. Meaningful projections of population are not available. Beeco has submitted a planned community development plan for approximately 75 acres of its property. The plan includes approximately 406 dwelling units. At an estimated 3.0 persons per household the population would be approximately 1,218 persons. Santa Ana Heights (Area No. 5)iis developed with an estimated 1,442 residents. The city does not expect any significant change in the population: D. The type of development occurring or planned for the area, including, but not Area No. 1 is the easterly half of the Santa Ana River Channel. The property is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District which uses the territory for flood control purposes. No change in land use tis••anticipated. Area No. 2 is the Beeco property which is in use for oil production. Ultimate development of territory is expected to be a mixture of land uses including residential, commercial and professional uses. Recently, the city has amended its general plan for approximately 75 acres located easterly of Bluff Road (proposed) between,17th Street and Pacific Coast Highway. Two-thirds of the territory is planned for residential uses. Thr remaining 25 acres is proposed for professional office/light industrial uses. Area No. 5 (Santa Ana Heights) is developed, mostly with low -density residential uses. The existing uses are not expected to significantly change. The Irvine Coast (Area No. 6) is presently vacant, undeveloped hillsides and canyons. The site has been the subject of much planning study in recent years. However, the ultimate land use decisions have not been made by The Irvine Company. Untii these decisions are ma4"nnexation of the Irvine Coas is unexpected July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 5 E. .The present and probably future service needs of the area. The infrastructure for serving the unincorporated islands west and north of Newport Beach already exist with sufficient capacity to serve these islands if annexed. Development of the Irvine Coast is uncertain, but would require the extension of roads and utilities. The cost -of extending capital facilities into this area would be primarily borne by the landowner. F. Local governmental agencies G. The city of Newport Beach is considered a full -service city providing such municipal type services as police, fire protection, water, sewer, parks and recreation, street lighting and maintenance and refuse collection. At the time the city's sphere of influence was adopted the city reported that its utility lines had been oversized to accommodate development down coast on the Irvine lands: Other agencies with facilities and service responsibilities within the subject sphere of influence include the County Sanitation Districts, the Irvine Ranch Water District, the Costa Mesa Sanitary District and the Mesa Consolidated Water District. Comments were solicited from these agencies 'regarding the subject review, but none were offered. of influence. Although surrounded by the city limits of Newport Beach the Beeco property (Area 2) is not within the Newport Beach sphere because of the landowner's wishes. Santa Ana Heights (Area No. 5) is substantially surrounded by the Newport Beach city •limits. The city is located north, east and south of the territory. Irvine Avenue runs along the westerly boundary and designates the dividing line between the Costa Mesa and Newport Beach sphere of influence. Many residents support the inclusion of their area within the Newport Beach sphere of influence as evidenced by the proposed "East Santa Ana Heights Annexation" to the city which is being discussed at the Newport Beach City Council at this time. - H. The existence of agricultural preserves on the area. Approximately 1,426 acres within the Irvine Coast were preserve contract. The contract on 55 acres expired in remaining 1,371 acres will be released this year. under an agricultural 1981 and the July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 6 COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) A negative declaration (copy attached)�was prepared for the reA, and update of the Newport Beach sphere of influence in accordance with state and local guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The negative declaration has not been appealed. Your commission, as lead agency purspant to CEQA, must adopt the prepared negative declaration prior to approving the proposed annexation. CONCLUSIONS California Government Code Section 54774 requires LAFCO to determine spheres of influence for each local agency. Following the adoption of these spheres LAFCO is required to periodically review and update the spheres of influence. The review of the city of Newport Beach's sphere of.influence is in compliance with existing legislation. In 1974 LAFCO adopted a sphere of influence for the westerly one-half of the city of Newport Beach as illustrated on the accompanying Exhibit A. Area No. 2 is the Beeco property. This property was not included within the city's sphere at the request of the landowner over the recommendation of the LAFCO staff and the objections of the city of Newport Beach. In 1976 LAFCO considered the inclusion of the Irvine Coastal area (Area No. 6 on the attached Exhibit B) within a city sphere of influence. The commission, rejected the city of Irvine's bid to place any of the Irvine Coast within'its sphere of influence. LAFCO determined the territory westerly of Muddy Canyon was in the Newport Beach sphere of influence and that territory easterly of Muddy Canyon was in Laguna Beach's sphere. The latter was deleted from the Laguna Beach sphere of influence in May, 1981 following LAFCO's review and update of the Laguna Beach sphere of influence. The territory within the Newport Beach's westerly sphere of influence consists of unincorporated islands completely surrounded by city limits. Since the last review, Newport Beach has annexed the "County Triangle" (Area No. 3). The easterly sphere of influence within the Irvine Coastal area was decided by the orientation of the physical features and the county's general plan which designated certain limited development adjacent to the city of Newport Beach. The city of Newport Beach is a full -service municipal corporation providing such services as police and fire protection, water and sewer, library, parks and recreation, street lighting and maintenance and r^.fuse collection. By Resolution No. 83-72 (copy attached) the Newport Beach City Council requested LAFCO include the Beeco property within the city's sphere of influence. The city further requests LAFCO not to amend any other portion of the established sphere of influence. Comments were solicited of the adjacent cities and special districts. As of this writing no comments were offered and it was assumed these agencies had no objection to the reaffirmation of the Newport Beach sphere of influence and the _ inclusion of the Beeco property within the city's sphere. July 27, 1983 Local Agency Formation Commission Re Review and Update of City of Newport Beach Sphere of Influence Page 7 Comments were also solicited of the major landowners, The Irvine Company and Beeco, Ltd. By telephone conversation on July 11, 1983, Mr. Bill Banning, representing Beeco, Ltd., advised he would no longer oppose the inclusion of the 'property within the city's sphere of influence. Mr. Banning did caution that Armstrong Oil and Mobil -Oil as lessees may object to the inclusion of the property within the city's sphere because the city has ordinances restricting oil extraction. The Irvine Company has not formally responded to our notice of the review and update of the Newport Beach sphere of influence: The Irvine Company has previously supported the inclusion of its coastal property westerly of Muddy Canyon within the Newport Beach sphere. Staff has recommended in 1974 and 1980 that the Beeco property be included within the Newport Beach sphere of influence. LAFCO has rejected our recommendation and excluded the property from the city's sphere at the request of the landowner. It appears the landowner no•longer objects to the inclusion of the property within the city's sphere. We then would again recommend the inclusion of the site within the Newport Beach sphere of influence. The site is a county island completely surrounded by the city limits of Newport Beach. The site cannot annex to any other city and under existing statutes the territory which surrounds it cannot be deannexed from Newport Beach without the consent of the Newport Beach City Council. Incorporation of the site as a new city is not a viable alternative. At such time as the landowner plans to develop the site into other uses it is expected that he will annex the property to Newport Beach. Inclusion of the Beeco property within the Newport Beach sphere -of influence would be consistent with the legislative intent and definition of a sphere of influence. Inclusion would not prevent the landowner from continuing oil production under the county's jurisdiction or preclude him from further developing the property under the county. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Receive the submitted staff report and accept the findings. 2. Adopt the prepared negative declaration. 3. Revise by resolution the established sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach to include the Beeco ,)roperty (Area No. 2) and reaffirm the balance of the sphere of influence as determined by Resolution No. 80-73 adopted August 27, 19,. Respectfully submitted, Richard T. Turner Executive Officer RTT:KWS:bd Attachments xc Newport Beach City Costa Mesa City Irvine City Huntington Beach City Mr. Dave Demehowski/The Irvine Company .Beeco, Ltd: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA July 27, 1983 On motion of Commissioner Jarrell, duly seconded and carried, the followi resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Section 54774 of the California Government Code mandates the Agency Formation Commission to develop and determine spheres of influence for each local governmental agency within the county; and WHEREAS, this Local -Agency Formation Commission did approve a sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach by Resolution No. 73-145, adopted September 12, 1973, Resolution No. 74-100, adopted August 14, 1974, and Resolution No. 80-73, adopted August 27, 1980; and WHEREAS, Section 64774 of the California Government Code requires the Loca Agency Formation Commission shall periodically review and update the spheres of influent developed and determined by it; and WHEREAS, this Local Agency Formation Commission on June 23, 1982, directed staff to continue scheduling periodic reviews of city spheres of influence. WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 54774 set July 27, 1983, to review said city of Newport Beach sphere of influence. WHEREAS, this Commission did review a map and report prepared by staff. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that this Commission revises the established sphere of influence for the city of Newport Beach to include the Beeco property and reaffirms the balance of the sphere of influence as determined by Resolutions Nos. 73-1460 74-100 and 80-73. AYES: COMMISSIONERS JAMES T. JARRELL, ROBERT E. DWYER, AND DONALD J. SALTARELLI. NOES: COMMISSSONERS NONE. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS HARRIETT M. WIEDER AND ROGER R. STANTON. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. 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 27th day of July, 2963. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Ihave hereunto set may hand this 27th day of July, 1983 RICHARD T. TURNER Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California Resolution No. 83-46 By u ./" , i. � %u acre ry M. AW" 4 TIC 41 V/ 1 gV I ff I KNorth - t 1 ,� +=„ _- ✓�.- 5���7';+ ill ��'. �.r ,,. 3.�-cl. t � d4 /I s„' '-' - ` �� .: ✓A' - c u '. '�c �' �v,; i Wit.--'� !�l 'li �. " =x:: ;�`'i e - [ _ n I j, v' �r �•"1+yj ;�{� =tf13t ., r � '!'•",:. ,/. H.tk: �%G�i1 ...1 , _ j : - 'f , r- ,t r 'r '.IIa�•i •�- ..1 ' J": 1!?'t•aliF ♦� r , _ r '%y ! % %� Y ,' r✓• :.r % ° • i�L .f - r � / -eiiie tid4t, 'l'-1: \ r. I• .P�"y' .l`�'��rf � :;•!- :r �/J� I I � � •may, ' _- t # '�'1 - �. / ', /.� ' �- sS• / 4JtIiF , S�3' � ✓<\ `h 4 4 I" � . /:� / �# 1 ' �� \ ,"�i � t i _ \f. � ' �� • /^• h '1� `y rl M1 „t{t ' j ti . P&lr •�y✓�ln't,l' �,.' `', /P/'y�.f' � II� • 1/ - � __ F•� :� ,fl -w - :./ i:' ti)t`:, l� l' - .K �. _ /t 'Ik hJ rl.. i /. 1� j �' / fir'•`. C a> h -y� •.! >��ff4-�ram •t';, c*i•". - , r I I jy�ty��;�� '� ��1 �'.c'M1 (�.���r � .=\ S.^� ✓,-1d ,; ,`;t.�, tic .ie, _.'i•. ,?o{l �T:' _ l `l��'3' `X.� t � � f�''"'J 1. �y ^� '.\ 1'7 � - rz h, �1. •-c-:.1� '� tt' . a�•,�`�S - � / - '� � �F •��7p' r �,,.� �tY�b�l-�;.1� � � r:� � 1 ,;' t , "/ry!?�;;,'f,(�U'�r ,i'!� ;u'•;,�� -.✓: �,"�\ ,! �''"7 YF fa. ,11 .J - 1- �r S ,�- d.�(, p'r,,�r � I,���" - ' 'C.':9^•..-':�d•1 •- �:�.. .:�/ �'1 �:r Y -� II '��''iGti'.Si/�'v�' ;:l.il t �:',4(r �,•'' ��" J` .} >y,�tµL ` f, R: f.: '`Y\j., p �h !�: ��+ -;tea• � . ��: • . ., . rYY &. W >.... .nit' IPn :\ r,-�:. ji• T / . /. iy , i. f VE,�♦'/ 1 1 /`�. ` �/% Y' L •lf .•' i '�yt�'/.{ \��� i � � .%.. 1� 4J�r :...r; �:;' t: ." i ii�%n�`1' � 9'^.'S% t1'-f�✓•%'. i �'+�5y'>`�.:i •� ����1 ^\`l ,i�'Rufi "o--: _ t i � y r_/% .. !/�. r[%: � % `.{pF.:.l�•' �i tflvRl`. '�,� �• t..l , t '}• ` �J<tt;�G , `� t � ` - �` ,'Y - r - ' "• ':- :1 -,: L. �� G,-'.S%�• r:�'T'%��'. - � AS.Fthi fit, [--.: ... c ,�w,��` , r ' ,f a• �- �;u-• yJ,^✓ '.�:,�-y't":-LJ,-•nz�f '. � : its - ��; i �I"%''1. � i, :( C• -f"" lt�rl ,t'-" �1G" <�'Lr�. • '�' xg i1132S61i" •• .. � ✓1 1�:;.. , lr''.: 'ra°�' � - , I�, , s {!, J'l y �1 yam _ o-r .• '�.. •' r�S-p-•.'•,�'•.r- •��) F /!%�� �'� /�:,••✓ . le:�l: /11 i a Y:i' t:Qi•: t I xr.. �.�; ', _ r'�" �..5, �. ,/`.,;' :�\. JS�;, r-''1•g.: /ere, of.fft[li 'G,.;,]y�Y 1 .( I ��a�. f l!tJ/ �! •' l��" , y ,''" t,Y «� �r ///.���� �, ( la„ r/ F I' �il !• U.\ .tip.. 'I� +-i'v^ba... ./ •�i: n:,n,'n �, r%l t/'� "'�, ✓�_ / i {: /.',','}a'�f:.l•.y � 1 f •r 'F?^'• �,„,;t' .t'' �_`-: , �N \" 1.1 `R tZl _ 1(,� k"• Zj"•'qy�-}� N .II'."U t(1}�•r`r Icy _ ', F^ ^J Ct-"J�!•l r'.,' ;�j _'iC ..:t«" ���r�J 'r ^•, J 1 a iG» •WO tCro