HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-08-25 i
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' t � AREA CODE 714
540-2910
OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �+t` 9 6 2-2 41 1
P. O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708
10844 ELLI5 AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP, 5AN DIEGO FREEWAY)
August 21, 1970
TO: 14EW3ERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5
Gentlemen:
Purusant to adjournment of the regular meeting held
August 12, 1_970, the Board of Directors of County
Sanitation District No. 5 will meet in an adjourned
regular meeting:
NOW
Tuesday, August 25, 1970
at 4: 30 p.m.
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
c eta y
Note : The Executive Committee will meet at 5 : 30 p .m.
following the District, No. 5 meeting.
MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT
County Sanitation Districts P. O. Box 517510844 Ellis Avenue
of Orange County, California Fountain Valley, CaliF., 92708
Telephones:
5 Area Code 714
540-2910
DISTRICT NO. - 962-2411
IIAugust 25 1970 - 4: 30 p.m.
The following is an explanation of items appearing
on the enclosed agenda, which are not otherwise self-explanatory.
No. 6 - Annexation Policy - On July 14th, the staff was directed
to draft an annexation policy for consideration by the Board.
Since there are several complicating factors concerning the
development of a standard annexation policy, the staff desires
further direction from the Board in an effort to avoid possible
time-consuming effort which would be wasted.
Included with the agenda is a memorandum concerning the
Districts ' investment in facilities which are equal to $310
per acre. In addition to the memorandum, we have enclosed
copies of annexation policies adopted by Districts Nos. 2 and
7•
At the suggestion of Chairman Parsons we have asked the
General Manager of the Irvine Ranch Water District to advise us
as to the charges to date which have been imposed on the
properties adjacent to District No. 5 which may be annexed
to our District in the near future. It is hoped that this
information will be received by meeting time.
After review of the available information, the Board may
wish to re-direct the staff concerning the development of an
annexation policy for the District.
No. 7 - Amendment to Agreement with the City of Newport Beach
for Collecting District Connection Charges . - The enclosed
letter from the City of Newport Beach requests that the
District Board consider amending the existing agreement between
the District and the City for the collection of the District' s
sewer connection charges. It appears that the current fees
paid to the City by the District are not equitable and that an
adjustment must be made. The City has suggested several
alternate methods of revising the agreement and our staff
recommends that the Board approve Alternate E which provides :
Alternate "E" Combination of fixed fee and "fixture
units.
The City would receive $4.00 for each single family
detachea residential unit. Assuming that each average
residential unit contains twenty fixture units, the City
coU'A"', SaMs2ffl'ot" Districts P.0. Box 5175
of Orange County, California 108L,14 Fibs Avenue
Fountain Valley, CaliF., 92703
DO I RA"_ I
Adjourned Regular Meeting
August 25, 1970 - 4: 30 P.m.
(1) Roll Call
3z Appointment of Secretary pro tem
Staff report re: annexation policy for the
District. See pages "A" 11B't and
ITC11
Consideration of motion to receive and file
letter from City of Newport Beach dated M _ � ; r -�
August 20, 1970, requesting an wiend-,i--nt to
the agreement for collection of sewer connection
charges; and directing the General Counsel to e n
prepare an amended agreement incorporating the
provisions of Alternate "E" and providing for
formal renegotiations at the end. of two years .
See page "D"
Staff report on discussions with Irvine Company
relative to amending terms of loan agreement
repayment provisions
Consideration of request from The Irvine Company
relative to relocation and reconstruction of
existing, trunk sewer in Bay-side Drive :
a. Consideration of motion to receive and file p4-
letter from The Irvine Corapany dated August
19, 1970, relative to relocation of Bayside
Trunk Sewer between Marine Avenue and
Pacific Coast Highway., see page "E"
( Verbal report of Engineer regarding this 9 matter; and,
c. Consideration of motion directing the General
Counsel to prepare a Sewer Relocation
Agreement between the District., the City of
Newport Beach arid. The Irvine Company. S,
(11) Adjoijrnriient
COUNTY SANITAI-IoiV UIS-1-RIC-I S
of ORANGE COUNTY,CAL!,OfN:11
P.O.BOX 5175
10844 ELLIS AVENUE
FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA, 92708
(714) 540-2910
August 14, l•JA f 0 (714) 962-241411
MEMORANDUM
TO: Fred A. Harper, General Manager.
FROM: Paul G. Brown, Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT: Acreage Annexation Fee for District No. 5
The 1,65 Financing Report for. the District prepared by Bartle
Wells Associates recoriiiended an annexation fee computed on the District 's
net investment in facilities and equity in joint works per acre tirhich,
at that time, ,-ras approximately 250. The report also r.ecomi-,letided
that this figure be re-computed each time an annexation is proposed.
As you know, no policy was adopted at that time and one
an).iexation (No. 3) took place without payment of any fees . Hoti•:ever,
at that time, the Board records show that the Directors stated that
they did not intend to establish a precedent thereby.
... As of June 30, 1970, the District 's net investment in facil_,_ties
and joint worms is $35 97,215. Its bonded debt and outstanding capital
obligations total $1,045,707, leaving a net worth of $2,651., 508.
The present area in the District is ,5J9 acres . Consequently, the
net investment per acre no:•r amounts to $310.
The Bartle Wells formula still appears to be valid and it seems
appropriate that the Board should- adopt a policy much along the sa-1'1e
lines as Districts Nos . 2 and 7 with an annexation fee for 1970•-71
established at $310 per acre. Rather than escalate this figure based
. on a construction cost index, I believe it should be recomm.end.ed that
it be re--co;iiputed annually and that the resolution establishing the
policy should so provide.
Agenda Ttei,i y 6 -A- District 5
RESOLUTION NO. 69-17-2
ESTABLISHING MNEXAT-TON POLICY
ARESOLUTION OF TIEE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. OF ORANGE COUNTY,
ESTABLISHING FEES AND PIiOCr;DUhES CONCERNING
ANNEXATIONS OF TERRITORY TO THE. DISTRICT
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to establish certain
requirements for territory seeking annexation to this District:.
NOV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1_ That the proponents of any application for
annexation of any territory to the District shall, as a condition .
to securing approval of the Directors of the District to such
annexation, comply with the followi.nc:
Yequi.re���ents: -
1 . Payment of all costs incur•reci in processing the
annexation .
P. Payrnent to the Di-strict of the. sum of $250.00 per
acre of territory so annexed . F,egit�ni.n- January 1 ,
1.970, and annually thereafter, this fee is to be
increased to reflect the Federal Water. Pollution
Control. AdminIstrati.on Sewer Construction Cos
Index for the Los Angeles i ctropolitan Area or
$1.0.00 per acre , whichever is greaten-, unless post-
poned by resolution of th:; Board .
3. That. annexed territory be subject to the teri-ris and
conditions of all ordinances p ;r•taininc; to fees
for connection to the District ' s faci.litics .
1� . The annexed territory shall be annexed into an
appronr. iatc scvieri ng agency for t.hn pur•posc of
Agenda Item #6 B-1 District 5
maintaining and operating the local sewer system
including pumping stations and force mains.
5. The local sewerage system serving the annexation
area shall be installed and connected to the
District ' s system without expense to the District.
6. The territory, upon annexation, shall .be subject to
all ad valorem taxes required for the retirement
of the existing and future bonds of the District.
Section 2._ That the procedures for annexations of territory
to the District shall be as set forth on Schedule "A" attached
hereto and made a part of this resolution, and the District ' s
staff is hereby directed to give to the proponents of any proposed
annexation a copy of Schedule "A" outlining the procedures to be
followed; and,
Section 3 . That the staff be directed to transmit to
the Local Agency Formation Commission a certified copy of this
. resolution; and,
... Section 11 . That the provisions of this resolution shall
apply to any annexation of territory to the District initiated
on or after March 12,' 1969; and,-
Section 5. That all other resolutions or motions
in conflict herewith are hereby repealed and made of no further
effect.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on March 12, 1J69.
Agenda Item #6 B- 2 District .
PROCEDURE AND FEES FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT
PROCEDURE: ,
I.. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and directed
to the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No . 2 of
Orange County.
2. Such written request MUST contain the following:
(a) The true and correct and complete legal description and
map of the territory for which annexation is requested. TAX BILL
DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSESS1,11ENT NUMBFRS ARE NOT ADEQUATE.
' (b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of every owner
within said territory and a designation of the portion or the interest
oi•aned by each person.
(c) The assessed value of each separate parcel_ of land within
the territory having a. separate assessment, as shot<n on the last preceding
equalized assessment roll of. Orange County.•
(d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the
territory proposed for annexation.
(e) Said written request must request the District to annex
said territory.
3. Fees to be paid; when and how :
(a) When written request is filed, it must be accorripan_i.ed by
a CASHIER ' S CBECK payable to County Sanitation District No . 2 of Orange
County in the sure of $325 .00.
Should these processing costs exceed the $325. 00 fee,
applicants will be requested to deposit the amount of such excess with
the District.
NO PART of this charge is refundable under any circumstances .
(b) The forutal petition for annexation is prepared by the
District and mailed to applicant for signature with a letter of: in-
struction and a statement of the additional fees . When the applicant
signs and 'rettzrr:s the formal petition for annexation, it must be
accompanied by
A CASHU.'.R I S Ci}ECK equal to a fee of $250. 00 per acre for
each acre to be annexed. This fee is refundable if the annexation fails .
hOT : All moneys paid to the District must be by cash,
cashier 's check, postal_ or bank money order or certified chock . NO
PERSONAL CHEMS WILL 13E, ACCEPTED.
The ab9ve fees are subject to change . The fee schedul
in effect at the tulle of actual payment of any fee is the one applicable .
11 . It is the policy of the: W.str1-ct not to accept for annexation
tlr,y i.rrcgulaxly Shaped territory whj} ch conr;!.sts of sul-div-i-sions or
proposed subdi.vir;i.on,; 1,-here i solatecl parcels of property 02' l.oi:s are
excluded from or arc not incluclocl L•;:i. -.11a.11 the t•crri.t:ory to be anncxc,d .
5. It is c :.sc nt•:i.;ll. to allow 60 d ,y;; from the time, forinr11 1lc t,a.[ :i.oil
is :i.£,nc:d ar�u fc•c • arc. p,<<i.d . }:o ,it:itic;]y no a ;c of -,,c-tiier
11111,11 after date of het1)-11-It;.
Adopted by the Board of D.i.r-ector,, M,-Irch 1 ?, 19C9 .
Agenda Item #6 B-3 District 5
RESOLUTION NO. 68-88-7
ESTABLISHING ANNEXATION POLICY
A RESOLUTIOr; OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7, OF ORANGE COUNTY,
ESTABLISHING FEES AND PROCEDURES CONCERNING
C' ANNEXATIONS OF TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, it is in the. public interest to establish certain
requirements for territory seeking annexation to this District; - and,
WHEREAS, Boyle Engineering, District ' s engineers, have
previously submitted a written recommendation, dated July 25, 1968,
reappraising he District ' s existing annexation-fee schedule and
recommending that certain requirements be established as conditions
to the annexation of territory to . the -District:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 . That the proponents of any application for
annexation of any territory to the District shall,, as a condition
to securing approval of the Directors of the District to such
�,. . annexation, comply- with the followi.ncr:
Requirements: .
1 . Payment of all costs incurred in processing the
annexation.
2. Payment to the District of the. sum of $250.00 per
acre of territory so annexed . Beginning January 'l,
1970, and annually thereafter, this fee is to be
increased to reflect the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration Sewer Construction Cost
Index for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, or
$10.00 per acre, whichever is greater, unless oosL-
poned by resolution of the Board .
3. That annexed territory be subject to the terms and
conditions of all. ordinances pertaining to fees ,
for connection to the District ' s facilities.
• 11 . The annexed territory shall be annexed into an
appropriate seworin arrency fof- the purpose of
Agenda Item #6 C-1 District 5
maintaining and operating the local sewer system
including pumping stations and force mains.
5. The local sewerage system serving the annexation
area shall be installed and connected to the
District'.s system without expense to the District.
6. The territory, upon annexation, shall be subject to
all ad valorem taxes required for the retirement-
of .the existing and future bonds of the District.
Section 2. That the procedures for annexations of territory
to the District shall be as set forth on Schedule "A" attached
hereto and made a part of this resolution, and the District ' s
staff is hereby directed to .give to the proponents of any proposed
annexation a copy of Schedule "A" outlining the procedures to be
fol lovi ed; and,
Section 3. That the staff be directed to transmit to
the Local Agency Formation Commission a certified copy of this
resolution; and,
Section IE. That the provisions of this resolution shall
apply to any annexation of territory to the District initiated
on or after October 9, 1968; and,
Section 5. That all other resolutions or motions thereof
in conflict herewith are hereby repelled and made of no further
effect.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on October 9, 1,90068.
Agenda Item #6 C- ? District 5
SCHEDULE "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 68-88-7
- Procedure:
1. All requests for annexation MUST be in writing and
directed to the Board of Directors of County Sanitation
District No, 7 of Orange County.
2. Such written request MUST contain the following:
(a). The true and correct and complete legal description
of the territory for which annexation is requested.
TAX BILL DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSESSPa;NT NUMBERS ARE
NOT ADEQUATE.
_ (b) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of
every owner within said territory and a designation
of the portion or the interest owned by each person.
(c) The assessed value of each separate parcel of
land within the territory having a separate assessment,
as shown on the last preceding equalized assessment
- roll of Orange County.
(d) The total number of voters, if any, residing in the
territory proposed for annexation.
(e) Said written request must request the District
to annex said territory, '
3. - Fees to be paid; when and hoTu:
(a) When written request is' filed, it must be accompanied
+� by a CASHIER' S CHECK payable to- County Sanitation
District No . 7 of Orange County in the Burn of $325 .00.
Should these processing costs exceed the $325 .00 fee,
applicants will be requested to deposit the amount
of such excess with the District..
NO PART of this charge is refundable under any
circuri`s'tances .
(b) The formal petition for annexation is prepared
by the District and mailed to applicant for
signature with a letter of instructions and a
statement of the additional fees . When the applicant
signs and returns the formal. petition for annexation,
it must 'be accompanied by a CASHIER' S CIIECK equal. to
a fee of •$250. 00 per acre for each acre to be annexed:
This fee is refundable if the annexation fail-s .*
NOTE: All moneys paid to the District must be
-by cash, cashier' s check, postal or bank money order
or certified check. NO PERSONAI, CHECKS VI1:LL BE
ACCEPTED,
The above fees are subject to change . The fee
schedule in effect at the time of actual payment
of any fee is the one applicable .
It . It is the policy of the Di-trict not to accept for
annexation any irreCul-arty shlgped terrl.t:ory whiclf c:ons:i.,ts
of subdivisions or prohos,ed where isolated
Agenda- Item #6 C-3 District 5
parcels of property or lots are excluded from or are not
included within the territory to be annexed.
5. It is essential to allow 60 days from the time formal
petition is signed and submitted to the District and
fees are paid. Positively no use of District sewer
.lines until after date of hearing,
Noe
Agenda Item6 0-1t District 5
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CALIFORNIA
City Hall
ft1kC�41F0 Rtl
3300 W. Newport Blvd.
Area Code 714
673-2110
August 20, 1970
Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager
County Sanitation Districts of Orange County
Post Office 8127
Fountain Valley, California 92708
SUBJECT: Request for Amendments to Agreement for Collection of
Sewer Connection Charges - Sanitation District No. 5
Dear Mr. Harper:
On July 13, 1970, Newport Beach City Manager Harvey L. Hurlburt
wrote Mr. Lindsley Parsons, Chairman of the Board of Directors of County
Sanitation District No. S, indicating the desire of the City to amend
the April 1, 1966 agreement by which the City serves as a fiscal agent
for the collection of charges from property owners wishing to connect to
the District's system.
.� As a result of our meeting in your offices on Monday, August 17,
it was agreed that I would provide Mr. J. Wayne Sylvester, District Direc-
tor of Finance and Secretary, with examples of new construction in different
areas of the city so that a comparison could be made of formulas by which
the city could be reimbursed for its services. The city now receives
four dollars ($4.00) from the District for each permit processed.
Five alternate methods have been explored for reimbursing the
City:
Alternate "A" Fixed fee for each permit processed.
The present fee is $4.00 per permit. If this formula
were continued, a fee of at least $6.00 would be in
order.
Alternate "B" Fee as a percentage of total revenues
collected for the District. This method is proposed by
the City in the July 13 letter. It is probably the easiest
formula to administer and would be responsive to changes
in district connection charges. The formula comparison
chart indicates charges at 3% and 5%.
O
Agenda Item #7 D-1 Distr:i-ct
Mr. Fred A. Harper -2- August 20, 1970
..� Alternate "C" Fixed fee for each "fixture unit"
in thestructure. The City would receive 10� or 2S�
for each fixture unit in a structure in the examples
described. This formula would be the most complex
to administer but would provide the most accurate
picture of actual processing costs.
Alternate 'TD" Combination formula with the City
receiving $4.00 per dwelling unit for all residential
construction and 10¢ or 2S¢ per "fixture unit" for all
other types of construction.
Alternate "E" Combination of fixed fee and "fixture
units." The City would receive $4.00 for each single
family detached residential unit. Assuming that each
average residential unit contains twenty "fixture units,"
the City would receive $4.00 for each twenty units for
all other types of construction including commercial
buildings and all multiple residential buildings.
COMPARISON STRUCTURES
1. Type:. 3-story commercial office
Address: 359 San Miguel Drive
.� Locality: Fashion Island
Valuation: $315,000
Plumbing Permit Paid: $74.00
Sanitation District Fees: $560.00*
Total Fixture Units: 80
2. Type: 177-unit apartment building
Address: 900 San Joaquin Hills Road
Locality: Park Newport Apartments
Valuation: $3,085,740
Plumbing Permit: $1,990.10
District Fee: $191355
Total Fixture Units: 20765
*All comparison structures were approved using the pre-January 1970
Sanitation District fee schedule.
AapnH@ Ttam J17 D-2 District 5
Mr. Fred A. Harper -3- August 20, 1970
3. Type: Duplex residential (apartment addition)
Address: 321 Larkspur
Locality: Corona del Mar
Valuation: $20,000
Plumbing Permit: $21
District Fee: $145
Total Fixture Units: 30
4. Type: Single family residential
Address: #9 Linda Isle
Locality: Linda Isle
Valuation: $70,000
Plumbing Permit:. $38
District Fee: $145 s
Total Fixture Units: 5S
5. Type: 16-story office building
Address: 620 Newport Center Drive
Locality: Newport Center
Valuation: $S,2S0,000
Plumbing Permit: $560.S0
District Fee: $7,73S.00
..w Total Fixture Units: 11105
ADDITIONAL DATA REGARDING FORMULA
1. In assessing fees for municipal plumbing permits and in deter-
mining the District connection fees for all commercial and multiple resi-
dential construction, both the City and the District rely on the 1967
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, as prepared by the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. The Equivalent Fixture
Units Schedule is found at Table 10-1.
2. The City in determining municipal plumbing permit fees does not
use "fixture units." Only the number of fixtures need be recorded for
municipal purposes.
3. As evidence of the substantial work required to properly analyze
plans for large and complex structures, the City charges a plan-check fee
equal to one-fourth the required plumbing permit fee for all buildings
containing over 180 fixture units.
4. Based on City and District concurrence on a formula, a new contract
should be developed immediately. Such a contract could be executed by the
Newport Beach City Council at its meeting of Monday, September 14. The new
formula would apply to all building permits issued after the agreement is
executed.
.MOO,
Agenda Item #7 D-3 District 5
Mr. Fred A. Harper -4- August 20, 1970
5. Regardless of the number of fixture units in a given structure,
no processing fee shall be less than $4.00 for each permit.
6. The new contract should provide for formal renegotiation at the
end of two years.
We look forward to hearing from the District.
Very truly yours,
Philip F. Bettencourt
Administrative Assistant
to the City Manager
PFB dm
Attachment - Table I'
Agenda Item #7 D-4 District 5
TABLE I
STRUCTURE FORMULA COMPARISON
c�
¢ A B C D E
H #1
C+
3-story commercial $6.00 3% = $16.80 10¢ = $ 8.00 Same $ 16.00
Fee $560.00 5% = $28.00 25� = $20.00 as "C"
FU 80
#2
177-unit apartment $6.00 3% = $590.65 10¢ = $276.50 $708 $552.00
Fee $191,355 5% = $967.75 25¢ = $691.25
FU 2,765
t7
i
#3
Apartment (addition) $6.00 3% = $4.25 10¢ = $3.00 $4.00 $6.00
Fee $14S S% = $7.25 25¢ = $7.50
FU 30
#4
t� Single family (new) $6.00 3% = $4.25 10¢ = $ 5.50 $4.00 $4.00
Fee $145 5% = $7.25 25¢ = $13.75
C FU 55
w
#5
16-story commercial
office $6.00 3% = $232.OS 10¢ = $111.50 Same $221.00
Fee $7,735 5% = $386.75 25� = $276.25 as "C"
FU 1,10S
{r;
r � Builders of Torlorrow's Cities...Today
August 19, 1970
County of Orange
Sanitation District No. 5
P. 0. Box 5175
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Gentlemen:
Discussing our meeting with you on August 11_, • 1970 , we would
hereby like to formally request that you take joint action
concerning approval of our proposed relocation and recon-
struction of your existing 21" trunk sewer in Bayside Drive
between Marine Avenue a_zd Pacific Coast Highway.
It is not anticipated that the decision to commit the area
easterly of the present District No. 5 boundary will be reached
NNW in the immediate future. Consequently, we cannot say at this
time if the 39" line as recommended, in accordance with
Shuirman & Simpson' s letter dated April 22, 1970, will be
ultimately required. If the District feels that the 39" line
should be installed at this time and is also willing to finance
the cost of upsizing, The Irvine Company would have no objection.
It is our intention to prepare plans for the reconstruction
of this line within a new alignment for Bayside Drive as
shown on the Tentative Map, which has been previously delivered
to your office. We would request that the existing 21." line
within the existing Right-of-Way on Bayside Drive be left in
service under the jurisdiction of yourselves or the City of
Newport Beach as sewer main servicing the connections which
presently exist along its length between the Balboa Yacht
Basin and the point of reconnection of the new sewer.
We will prepare the construction drawings for the new trunk
sewer in accordance with the standard specifications and
requirements of the District. These plans will be prepared
and the subsequent construction of a similar 21" sewer will
be made at no cost to the District.
The Irvine Company•550 Newport Center Drive•Newport Beach.California 92660 (714)644.301 1
Agenda Item 7i9a E-1 District 5
V Page 2 The Irvine Company
August .19, 1970
If you have any questions or need any further information in
order to provide us with Board action of your approval of this
proposed relocation, please call me.
Sincerely,
ij+ O u
Robert L. Snyder
Project Engineer
RLS/lj
cc: Raub, Bein, Frost & Assoc.
Agenda Item f9a E--2 District 5
9
!
76
eo
-73
1It I
JOa
/93��
1 '
I : C�' , 1 �- V�1 C�t��'t" ��liCf{'%"L+✓y� ////7 L 'I �A �O,�1 C C �� � � -
... I 70/7 1 �< <�v • ': ��-� 1 �3 6 2 St,1, `/0 0 00 0 o i
i . _ . ► ._ .. .. 'I t 7 L C c c�.� ': �..�:(�',�/j C�it v o o,0�1 z G�o o v, o-�� . _ � _...
I :� �/lwtc�-,•� /x ';n0 ro0
? �7 3 Pa-� v►u_,� � ,
' G �� � t ✓ i� ��.a� Q c9 d v � O
7 v/-/s-
qF
j / a
'e7,? 5��
o r � •�
0� ��c cam% -� ! ^o
i /
I
!I
f ;
�' •✓ I it i !��. I ! I�� _'.. � -':y !! -
I ;
i;
II '
713/ Llr o
OL J O)I I I
( 1
1 i
(
II ; I 1 li 1
197 r o
t I
I {
k i ,
II ! I ! !
1 1
! IRV UP WAHR EMU
POST OFFICE BOX D. I
NNEW IRVINE , CALIFORNIA 92664
August 20, 1070
Mr. Fred Harper, General Manager
Orange County Sanitation Distracts of
Oran-e County
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California
Re: Upper Harbor View Hills Annexation to the City of Newport
Beach
Gentlemen:
The area proposed to be annexed to the City of Newport
Beach known as Harbor View Hills Annexation - Phase 3 presently
lies within the Irvine Ranch Water District and also within Im-
provement District No. 1 (Sewer) of the District. This area
was not included in the original Sanitation District No. 14 but
was included in Improvement District No. 1 when Sanitation Dis-
trict No. 14 was dissolved. A map showing the present District
`� areas is enclosed for your information.
Taxes have been assessed on the Improvement District
since it' s formation as follows:
1966-67 0. 5264 land value only
1967-68 0. 5252 land value only
1968-69 0. 5357 land value only
1969-70 0. 7249 land value only
1970-71 0. 7249(Proposed) land value only
Present assessed value of the area in question approxi-
mates ($1,350.00) , or one thousand three hundred and fifty dollars
per acre, land value only, and at the present tax rate this equals
($9.79) , or nine dollars and seventy-nine cents per acre. We do
not have the prior assessed valuations readily available but un-
doubtedly they were much lower before Harbor View Hills develop-
ment started.
We hope this supplies the information you desire, if we
can be of further help please call.
Very truly yours ,
William H. Eppinger i
Genera]_ Manager
Irvine Ranch Water District
WHE: sgt
Enclosures
Meeting Date � Time 3 Q District No.
Type of Meeting
JOINT BOARDS DISTRICT 1
Culver Griset Herrin
Arbiso Lewis Miller Coco
;Baum Hogard Porter
.Berton Westra Allen Phillips
Christie Root
Clark Magnus DISTRICT 2
Davis Bousman
Dutton _ Pebley Just _ Harper
Finnell Gomez Christie Root
Gibbs Clark Magnus
Green Shipley Culver
Griset Herrin Dutton Pebley
Harvey Kanel Finnell Gomez
Herrin Griset Herrin Griset
Hirth Croul Sims Zuniga
Hyde Kroesen Smith Hileman
Just Harper Wedaa Machado
McInnis Hirth Winn Schniepp
McWhinney Allen Phillips
Miller Coco
Parsons DISTRICT 3
Porter
Rogers Hirth Culver
Shipley Coen Arbiso Lewis
Sims Zuniga Baum Hogard
Smith Hileman Berton Westra
Wedaa Machado Christie Root
Winn Schniepp Clark Magnus
Hirstein Allen Davis Bousman
Allen Phillips Dutton Pebley
. . . . . . . Green Shipley
Mitchell Harvey Kanel
Boyd Goldberg Herrin Griset
Hyde Kroesen
Just Harper
OTHERS McWh.inney
Sims Zuniga
Harper Allen Phillips
Brown
—
Sylvester DISTRICT 5
Carlson ✓
Clarke _ Parsons
Dunn Hirth Croul
Finster Allen Z Phillips
Galloway
Hohener DISTRICT 6
Keith
Lowry Porter
Maddox McInnis. Hirth
Martinson Allen Phillips
Nisson
Piersall DISTRICT 7
Sigler �—
Stevens Miller Coco
Tremblay Griset Herrin
•.� Crabb Porter
Rogers Hirth
_ Smith Hileman
Hirstein Allen
DISTRICT 11
DISTRICT 8 Shipley Coen
Gibbs
Mitchell Allen Phi11i'�)
Boyd Goldberg
Allen Phillips
7/8/70 gc