Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout(1972, 02/14) - C-1 - Amended0 C -1 ANNEXATION GUIDELINES It is recognized that the City of Newport Beach has certain "spheres of influence" and that said areas may be considered for annexation to the City. In evaluating a proposed annexation of a "sphere of influence" to the City of Newport Beach, a number of guidelines should be utilized to assist in a determination of whether the annexation is in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach. By way of illustration, but not limitation, examples of these guidelines to test a proposed annexation proposal are as follows: 1. Public Reaction - Attitude of public agencies and private organizations in and around the area that may be affected by the annexation. 2. Over - lapping Taxation - Degree of double taxation resulting from the annexation and what may be done to eliminate any such condition. 3. Duplication - Extent to which duplication of services would exist or could be eliminated as a result of the annexation. 4. City Standards - Ability of the City to require annexed areas to be raised to City standards, is, by assessment districts. 5. Tax Base - Ability to broaden the tax base by annex- ation of land with existing or potential for high revenue producing improvements. 6. Planning - Ability to continue an orderly program of City development based upon general plan implementation projections. 7. Transportation - Ability to correct inter -area street circulation deficiencies and inadequacies, thus promoting a more efficient flow of people and goods. 8. Boundaai - Opportunity to realign boundaries that more closely approximate logical man - made or natural physical barriers. ANNEXATION GUIDELINES - Page Two 9. Safety - Ability to better control fire, police, public health and safety oriented problems which respect no municipal boundaries. 10. Service - Ability to eliminate awkward and irregular boundaries causing difficulty and ineconomies in supplying utilities and city services. 11. Homogeneity Ability to add residents who, in terms of social, ethnic, cultural, economic and political interests and habits already are related to the City. 12. Control Ability to protect City taxpayers against future costs incurred to correct prior improper land development. 13. Public Facilities Ability to provide space for specialized public uses which are inappropriate in central locations. 14. Elimination Ability to eliminate existing or potential land uses and improvements considered a blighting or deteriorating influence. 15. Preclusion Probability of the elimination or oppor- tunity for county areas to incorporate to the detriment of existing cities. 16. Image Ability to increase City stature by annex- ation of land and /or improvements with exceptional characteristics. 17. Cost Benefit Analysis Ability on the basis of cost benefit analysis to produce excess revenue over cost of govern- ment services. Examples of revenues to be considered and evaluated are property taxes, sales taxes, licenses, permits, service charges, and other similar and typical taxes and fees. These are to be considered as "benefits" in the cost benefit analysis. An example of services which reflect cost to governmental agencies are: street maintenance, trash pickup, libraries, parks, fire and police protection, schools, flood control facilities, similar governmental services, and attendant amortized capital outlay costs. Adopted - February 27, 1967 Reaffirmed - November 12, 1968 Reaffirmed - March 9, 1970 Reaffirmed - February 8, 1971 Amended - February 14, 1972