The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1974-02-05; City Council; 2290; Annexation Study~ .-- /--'[-I/ Date- ~h~~ 5, 1974 . Referred To: City Council- a. .., . -. Submi ttcd By: ' Dlanninrr Department . Subject: 4nnexation Studv . . .. .. . -I- ;' ,r .. :. . - Stst'ement of the E4atter' - I The Cit,y Council ,directed the Plannincr StafF on 4ucrust ?l., 1"7?, to nrbare a study for the nurnose of develoninrr an annexati'on r)rom-anl f.or those Cnuntv lands within th&i Carls- had snhere of influence. ,. The attached-.renorf is a summary of that'studv and its recommendations, a *w . - ._ .. .. . .. I. *. .. .. . -- .. .. f *.. -. -. ,. -. a* .. .. .. .? ..- .- Fxh i b i t .. .. . .. 1. Van #l - CuFrent Annexations' within Snhere of Influence. a. . . 2.. Yap #2 - :tatus o'f.County :Land within Sohere of. influence.. . -* -. . 3. b.~emorandum~.from Plannina Director sumarizincr annexation stufly. .. 4.. . 5. Summarv of annexation 0rpc.edures to he sent to nrowrty owners. . * .. . b. Sarrlhle let& to- he sent. to Dronerty owners. _- 0 EXH1BITS:WILL BE SHOWN .ON PROJECTOR * * *. .. .- Staff Reconmendat ions to. City Manager tea Staff recommends that the City Coun,cil initiate' the recommendations &nhined in the at- tached memorandum for rplicitincl restionse fromoroverty owners in non-annexed areas and orderinq annexation priorities. .. .. c . . AB No. -- ,- - Date: Felmary 5. 1974 City Manager's Recommendation The attached study outlines an annexation procedure and priorities a city can follow in an attempt to fill in the central County portion of the City area. It is recommended the Council instruct staff to proceed with procedures. ' these annexations based on the proposed policy and Council Action 2-5-74 Council accepted recommendations of City Manager. -2- . - ..... - ............... .......... .... .. .... ... ' e- ... .. .. ......... ... .. ......... ..... .. ......................... : . ........... i .......... .............................. ........... , .................. i.. ................... ...... ... ...... ..... . . ,. ... .). ,. . .- -.._-. . .._,_. .. - .... .. .1.*.. ... ........ ........ ....... ........ ........... ..,. , ,. .................................. *- ,._--.I-. _-_. - -.-- -_ ........ ..-.._-.L_......____....._. . ......... ..... . ., -. ....... .... .... ... .. t ... .... __.. ._., .-.! ._.. .._, .. , .... - .--- . i ...* . --. - .! -... L . . __.. ...; .... L ....... ...... .... ...... .,. . ...... ..... ....... ...... ..... . ~... .. , .... ..,._ .?... ..,,-. ..,. . ...-.. ..... ....... ....... ........ ....... ......... - ..... - .......... .- . .. - .... ...... ... 1 ... - ...... ...... ....... ...... - .... .... ../.._ ........ ............ .... ..........,..... ....................... .... - .............. ..... ~ ,..... .......... .................... ...... * ................. ....................... ...... I ............. ...... , ......-..... ... .. --... i... .. ...... -.-- ..--__. ~ I_ .___._____ . - ................. - .. ....... , ..... .~ ..-. ...... ....-- I ....... ...._l.. .... ~ ............._... ........ ~. ........... -. .. . ..*.. ... -... . -. . -... ..... ......-..... .. .... ..... ..... .... i .... i ..... .._.. ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... -.... ..... ...... ...... .... .... .... ..... .... .... . . _. . .... _-_ _--_. . ........ . . _. . ..... -._. .. ...... -.-.. ...... .__-- .... .. -. - ... .. .. .. .... ..... MAP #I .. .. ... .. .... .... .......... ,_ ...... ...--... .... __._ ......... -- -. .. _.__.. .. .. .... . .L~RRENT STATUS OF COUNTY LHhU ... ..... ... .................. ............ ... .......... . , .................. .I ............... ............... .... ., ............. I__-- ...._-.. ....... .- ... ........... .- ........ . ._.._. ..... .... .... .... ......... ... , . ., .. ..... .MAP # 2 ... -- 31 10 11 -1- .. ,. 1 - Explain the current state of annexations within the i 1 Cdrlsbad sphere of influence; I 13 l5 design and facil it2te an orderly annexation program; - Discuss legislative proposals relative to annexation; - Describe alternative actions which could be taken to ! I facilitate ultimate annexations. I 19 2a ! the 1 following activities aimed at developing an orderly annexation pro- / ' gram: findings of the preliminary Study, Staff would recommend the 25 26 I sensual annexations. 1 i 2. Applicants for annexation should be.encouraged to ! Icon-tzct adjacent propzrty oliiilers in kopes of inclt!d'r,g then -i~: the- 3‘: consent. I! j! !! 30:; desi9nated as “poter?tially inhabited” do -- cot meet the crjttei-ion of 2- I: I, ! I j j 1; The infcrmation includes: property ownership, acreage, assessed valuation ar,d tax districts of all pG:'cels, and location of resi- dznces (shovin on !4zp g2). B. Drs,ft a letter to property Qrlrners which would inform th?m of the annexation at this time, invite their questions and ccm- merits, and test the reaction for possible consent or protest, Stzff feels that these letters will not only invite comments which can eliminate potential stumbling blocks to annexation (or vice versa), but it can also answer some concerns which property oviners are likely to have and ease any confusion prior to Public Hearing. C. Prepare several alternative annexation programs on the ba- sis of owner-initiated, council-initiated, -- consensual, forced (j .e, under protest) and inhabited annexations and var-ious combinations thereof. D. Develop an informal series of annexstion priorities based on the directive of the City Council to develop an annexation pro- gram which would minimize time and labor involved. Briefly suinmar- izcd, high priority annexations would be: 1. Consensual 2. Within the county island 3. Uninhabited 4. Large in size 5. Exclusive of encunbranccs or restrictive features (e.q., in need of improvements) 6. Would not leave additional county islands. E. Dctcrrriine ill; any of the areas proposed to be e+/cr?tualiy annexed would be difficult to service. Discussion with various - -3- -- 1911a~ea of thz land to be annexed, and -the land to be annexed is con- i; I/ 25'ilengthy and tedious and can promote ill feeling on the part. 0.: the 961: property oune;ps. Having exhausted 31-1 alternatives phased con- 27 ii sensual anti.?xations, however , forced s,nnexation could !J$ a jIeces- I/ f/ 28jl,,,y and useful taol. ti I/ 29 !; 5. - Ini?.abi-teeri -- Annexations: It is p.robab?e that an election 3ojqs.~jl? b2 necessary for an inhabited annexation in the area marked 1: (I -- 25 I! I: - II I 1 d;-ti,.ins ,p.tag?d be ?~gal!y ar!d practiczily qi1eL;tioilable. I1 i\j, si: 23;2~ E;;IF(jf?!,i CITY n:.i!, n''.,'T'{2j'if]3.I il, t\ !: BC J __________ _____._~ -- -- ---------- --- -- ~~r;atz t3i 11 1326 (;lniSo;-m C-ity Annex;ltion Act), cLrr-t-ent1.y be- I: ~ng h?ai-d by ti22 Senate Local Government Comini tte.2, proposes sever- .C a1 changes in annexation proceedings, vih'ich, 7-i passed, I.;OU'I~ sig- nificantly sinplify the process of annex-ing both inhabited and un- inhabited arzas. Cogznt features of Si3 1386 include: A. A City could initiate annexations for inhabited areas. I' jl ll 11 ii Jl 9 1 (This is not currently allowed.) LO ii B. The definition of "i-nhabited territory" would be changed 11J to mean territory which is used or zoned for residential, commer- 1211 cial, industrial, institutional or governmental use which has a 13i'population-to-area ratio of two or more registered voters residing- 1411 therein. All other territory would be deemed uninhabited. (NOTE: 15'; All of the anticipated annexations of Carlsbad ivould be considered 151; uninhabited under this definition.) 17 /; C. The proposed legislation trroilld simplify petition require- 181rnegts for both inhabited and uninhabited annexations to: 1) sig- /i I; I: II c;f 70% or more of regfstered voters; or 2). 10% of the pro- i D. The proposed legislation would terminate proceedings under owning 10% or-more of the assessed valuation. E. In inhabited territory: 1) Proceedings would terminate 1 i i 22imajority pro-test defified as: 50% or more of the value of land and -- I; 291 23'' ir;iLcov.ements for inhabited territory and 50% or more of the land I/ - - 1 assessed value; and 3) If less than 10% protest is filed, t10 elec- t 321; hearing, notice or election ?P it is less than 50 acres, is I! /j ti II 1 -5- I 1; -- A- 42d by I. , ana ; s dif 'I a ';I 'v! c sjmp ude 52 tural cu'id e1i;ninate a ly thdt annexati pardkion of an a barrier 3r land ex< s-ti must b a by a p d 2 con stree anoth i ty i vein e ti t i L! 1 ned by 7 tY -5- -- A- (1) s2t not less than 40 mr mora thm 60 days after passags of resolution. B, L (I) (2) Iiearjng set not mors than 30 days after pz'-ssage of resolxtian. city clerk cases copy of resoluti.cn -to IX pu~~ishsc~ at leait onca not less 3Anai.i 4 days prior to hemkgi or CQY of resau- tion to be posted not less tkra 7 days before the hearjng, (3) Hearkg. Chmges in bounda5.es subn%ted to loczl agency fornation com&ssion for qprayzl. 9. Fjle statemefit or nzp or plzt xith State Boar& or" Equd5zation..