O.C.’s Largest City May Get Even Bigger : Growth: Irvine officials plan to study the possibility of annexing up to 37 square miles of unincorporated land.

Stung by the possible loss of up to $8 million in construction fees from a housing development just outside the city limits, Irvine officials might consider annexing as much as 37 square miles of unincorporated land on the edges of the city.

The undeveloped land lies within Irvine’s “sphere of influence” but is under county jurisdiction.

Some city leaders said that annexing all or part of the land would make for more consistent zoning and planning in the area and would prevent the city from losing more development fees to the county.

They also argue that the current arrangement confuses those who live or do business on the city-county border and hampers the city’s ability to help Irvine residents with disputes involving county land.

“I think annexation is a good thing because it gives (the city) control of the land,” said Mayor Michael Ward. “If it’s county land, we have no authority over it.”

Much of the unincorporated land is on the northeastern fringes of the city. Annexing the area would nearly double the size of Irvine, which is already Orange County’s largest city in terms of land mass. Officials estimate that annexation could eventually boost the city’s population of 110,330 to more than 200,000 once a variety of housing and commercial developments are built.

The City Council is set to look at the issue next month when the planning staff delivers a study of annexation options. The report will outline the process and examine the pros and cons of expanding the city’s borders.

No one expects the discussion to prompt the sudden annexation of county land, but it will give council members a chance to set an annexation strategy and perhaps prioritize what lands they consider most important.

The city’s action comes more than a year after it failed to annex 360 acres of Irvine Co. land near Hicks Canyon Wash that is slated for a 2,880-home development known as Northwood Point.

The City Council approved plans for the project, but a group of residents concerned about the size of the development attempted to block it through a petition drive. A legal fight ensued, and the case is still working its way through the courts.

In the meantime, the Irvine Co. decided to build the project on county land and dropped the annexation plan.

Officials estimate that the city will lose $4 million to $8 million in development fees if Northwood Point is built in the county instead of the city.

“And you know the minute (residents) move in, they will want to be part of the city, have the Irvine police and have a say on the Irvine City Council,” Ward said. “So we’ll eventually annex (the land) and receive all of the expenses but none of the (development) revenues.”

The prospect of this scenario playing itself out with future developments concerns city officials, who said Irvine needs the fees in order to provide services for residents.

Council member Barry J. Hammond said he fears that future developments on county land might not be built with Irvine’s strict planning standards and might clash with the city’s master plan concept.

Even controlled-growth advocates who opposed the city on Northwood Point acknowledge that annexing the county lands makes sense.

“I am not pleased with this City Council, but I am even less pleased with the county,” said activist George Gallagher. “At least with the City Council, we have more recourse and can put them on the spot.”

Any annexation would require the approval of the Local Agency Formation Commission. The city would first have to explain how it plans to zone the land as well as conduct environmental impact studies. Irvine and the county would also decide how property tax revenue would be divided.

City officials stressed that the process would require a partnership involving Irvine, the county and the Irvine Co., which owns much of the land in the sphere. “It takes all three parties to play the game,” said Robert C. Johnson, Irvine’s director of community development.

Annexation would strengthen the city’s political muscle on regional issues as well as allow Irvine to better help residents with neighborhood concerns, Hammond and Ward said.

A case in point, they said, occurred last week when a group of residents converged on the City Council to complain about the removal of 6,000 Valencia orange groves from farmlands next to their homes. The residents lived in Irvine, but since the farm is located on county land, there was little the council could do.

“Our hands were tied on the orange grove deal,” Ward said. “Because it was county land, we had no authority over it.”

Irvine Expansion Irvine officials are eyeing as much as 37 square miles of unincorporated land on the city’s fringes for possible annexaton. The mostly undeveloped land lies within Irvine’s “sphere of influence” but is controlled by the county.