Claremont Bid to Annex Land Takes Aim at Developers

With open land becoming scarcer and the demand for housing continuing to soar, developers are heading for the hills.

While neighboring cities such as Glendora, San Dimas and La Verne grapple with the issue of hillside development, Claremont officials are unable to control growth in much of the foothills that overlook their city because the hillsides are in an unincorporated area.

City officials, sensing that developers are now eyeing Claremont’s rustic slopes, are launching an ambitious effort to annex six square miles of foothill land to the north and west of the city’s boundaries.

If all of this area is annexed, Claremont will grow by more than 50% in size. However, the acquisition would give the city only about 550 new residents, since much of the area consists of steep slopes and largely inaccessible canyons.

Because the rural hillsides would provide little in the way of tax revenue, their inclusion in Claremont could end up costing the city more than $100,000 a year in additional services, such as brush clearance and police protection. But Mayor Judy Wright said the move would preserve a priceless resource for the city.

“The only reason we’re doing it is out of our own special interest--because we want to preserve the hills,” Wright said. “The land is ripe (for development). . . . We don’t want it to look like Arcadia. We don’t want it to look like Diamond Bar.”

Possible Development

Wright and other officials fear the county Regional Planning Commission would allow developers to build as many as 2,500 homes in the unincorporated foothills near Claremont. Such development, officials have said, could clog Claremont streets with traffic and scar the hillsides that are visible from most of the community.

“Since we look at the hillsides, we want to keep them as much in the natural state as possible,” said City Manager Glenn Southard.

Wright and Councilwoman Diann Ring, who have sought to annex the foothill areas since 1975, take pride in the city’s strict hillside development ordinance. By annexing the foothills, they said, the city could restrict development to 320 homes and preserve the appearance of the hillsides.

“Development will take place in certain clusters, off (of) the hillsides,” Wright said. “The rationale is that there not be houses dotted all along the hilltops, and (that we) leave the hilltops and vistas free of development.”

John Shea, a planning assistant with the Regional Planning Department, said that he does not know the number of homes that the county would allow to be built in the hillside area. He said the area is now zoned as a low-density rural area, but a developer could request a change in that designation. Ring said it is unlikely the county would control growth the way the city would.

“What we’ve experienced in the past is that when development occurs in the county, it’s not done to our standards,” Ring said. “Then later (residents of the area) want to annex and we have to inherit all the headaches.”

‘Fire and Brimstone’

To persuade residents to support annexation, Ring said she occasionally resorts to her “fire-and-brimstone-speech,” in which she argues that poorly planned development can have more serious consequences than traffic and aesthetic damage to the foothills. As evidence, she cites a Dec. 8 brush fire, which destroyed seven homes in the unincorporated area west of Claremont.

“Fighting hillside fires is very expensive and we all, as taxpayers, have to pay to fight those fires,” Ring said. “Why should we allow willy-nilly development on those hillsides?”

Providing that all goes well, the area should be annexed by next summer, Southard said. For the process to begin, at least 5% of the 391 registered voters who live in the unincorporated area must sign petitions expressing their desire to join the city.

The city’s request to annex the area is then reviewed, and possibly modified, by the county Local Agency Formation Commission. If LAFCO approves the annexation, the Claremont City Council would hold a public hearing at which residents could protest the annexation.

If fewer than 25% of the registered voters in the affected area protest, the council may annex the land. If more than 25% but fewer than 50% protest, a special election would be held on the matter. If more than 50% of the registered voters object, the annexation would be terminated.

Claremont officials need only 20 valid signatures to get the ball rolling, but have opted to try to win the hearts of foothill residents before beginning any formal annexation proceedings. Wright and Ring have met with three neighborhood groups this month to persuade residents to support annexation, and they plan several other such meetings in January.

“I think very honestly the reaction so far has been mixed,” Ring said.

Various Responses

The council members said they received their least favorable response in the Live Oak Canyon area west of Claremont. Many residents there said they enjoyed living outside the city limits and saw no reason to change anything, Wright and Ring said.

“City means urbanization to them, and county means rural,” Ring said. “I think it’s ridiculous to call a county area like Diamond Bar rural.”

Another source of opposition, the council members said, is concern by residents that the city will require them to pay for expensive improvements to their homes and neighborhoods.

“We had people going door to door saying, the city will make you put in sewers and street lights and sidewalks and your taxes are going to double,” Ring said.

Wright said residents would only be charged for improvements if the majority of homeowners in an area choose to have them installed.

In making their case for annexation to residents of unincorporated hillside neighborhoods, city officials are stressing that continuation of status quo is not an option.

“They really think they can maintain their hillside the way it is and not be pressured by development,” Wright said. “There will be pressure for development, whether they’re in the county or in the city. It’s just a question of whose (development) standards you’re going to use.”