Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report J: STAFF REPORT Graham Road Area Annexation The initial public hearing on the question of annexing the Graham -Wellborn. Road area into the City of College. Station. was held on Januaty.23. 1992. During that heariJ:Ig several points w<::re raised for additional information by Council. These included: The fiscal impacts of the annexation. The fiscal impacts of annexation alte~tives. including a minimal annexation as well as expanding the annexation to take in all the area along Graham Road. The potential for College Station and Bryan having joint use of electrical facilities necessary to serve the area. The fISCal impact of upgrading Graham Road to standard above thatused by Brazos County. These specmcpoints. along with other questions raised atthat hearing~are addressed below. Three. scenarios. are . discussed ill terms...ofadvantages . and disadvantages .to the City and.. in tel1DS of net fiscal impact to the City. ......COnsiderationofutility, . road .and.otherissues. follows. Scenario I.. MinitnalAnnexation The first scenario to be considered is the annexation of only.the properties that requested annexation along with a portion of the undeveloped area between the City arid those tracts. ~Ilrls scenario is illustrated in Figure 1. ThiS minimal annexationsceIlal'io allows College Station to provideutiJity services needed for . theproposedex~onofOL.Th.eprincipaladvan~ges of annexing in this fashion are: Economic ..development.is....facilitated. Annexation canbeaccomplished.withminimal.ornoopposition. There are several.. disadvantages . associated with thisaltemative annexation.. .. These include: Lower revenues from fewer. customers. and.. less tax. base. Water and electrical lines will pass along tra.ctsthatwillbe. customers of a parallel, duplicate facility. . Sanitation and sewer services will also pass potential customers whileprovidin!~ setvicesto the tracts that have been annexed. .The.irregularshapedb()undaries.create.a..potential....for...confusionin..ein~rgency services. This annexation scenario,. if carried . out, wouldfutv~.a net negativefiscal..i.mpact,orcost of annually. 'This. impact ",ouldchan.ge to a. net annual C<JStof ........... ... .< if the City were to invest ..anestimated$856,288.0(l.to upgtflde. GrahatnRoadtoa 39' wide . city street . withicurlb andgutter~ The. annexationproposa.lpresentedtoCouncilandthepublicat.theJanuary23 . hearing . includes t! r INSERT FIGURE 1 Page 2 4 I the 160 acre and 133 acre tracts located between College Station and the Graham Road - 01 area. '. This configuration also includes all of the industrial tracts along Graham Road. . A portion of Graham Road must be annexed in order to annex the industrial tracts along the south side of the road. (Council can enlarge this portion of the road as desired, hut this will have to be part of a sep~rate annexation action due to notification requirements.) This proposal does not include the one acre. located at thesoutheastemcomerof the intersection of North. GrahamandW ellbofJn Road This altemativeisillustratedin Figure 2. As in the case above, there are both advantages and disadvantages to the City in this proposal. The.. advantages include: This configuration leaves one electrical supplier in the area. There would be no need for duplicate or parallel electrical facilities. The City would receive lIlore revenue from a combination of more customers and a more effective utility and service delivery . The potential for confusion in emergency services is greatly reduced. The City would establish land use, oil exploration and subdivision ordinance control on a . large und~velopedarea.... That area has already been the subject of preliminary development plans. andinquifes.. from oil drilling interests. Disadvantages associated with this . proposal include: Opposition from property owners that do not desire to be annexed. Loss of the potential foreost recovery for sewerjmprovementsUl1lesstheCityestablishc~s impact fees ordinances. ThisannexationsceIlal'io,ifcarried out, wouldhave.a positive fiscal impact, projectedto be approximately.. . .annoolly. . This impact would chafigeto.a net annual cost of. . if the City were to futldtheredevelopmentofGtahamRoad toa39'wide.urbansection street. Scenariom -Annexationof All Area . North of Graham Road Thethird.al~rnative .examinedisthe. annexation of an the property in the area bounded by College Statio~W~ll00rn.R.oad,<.Traham Road and SH6. .. See Figure 3. This configuration would have.. advantages . and disadvantages similar to theproposalabove....Additional advantages include: The construction of'W~terand sewer services to the 01 area will bring these services along the Grahatn Roa~flpntage.The addition of suchtnunicipaiservicestothearea will enhance area develoPtnent{Xltenti~l..AnnexationwouldbetteraligntheCity'sboundaries ,and it's service. area. Thisco1lfigutationprpvides unifortIl,easllydistiIlguishedphysjca.lboundaries with a minimum.potential for confusion in .emergency..services. This altemative would fill in an existing .. "doughnuthole" within the City .Limits~ 11rls configuratiollwouldanowforfitrther expansion southward (across Graham Road) if developmentpressure,economicdevelopmentor'otherneed arises. Page 3 r ~ iNSERTtIGURE..2 Page 4 ~ 4 INSERT FIGURE 3 ; "1\ Disadvantages are similar tothosegivenforScenariolland include: Increased opposition due to the increased number of property owners involved This annexation scenario, if carried out, would also have a positive fiscal impact, projected to be ....A net loss of is..projected if the City were to upgrade Graham Road to a 39' wide urban street. Service Plan The Local GovernmentCode requires thata Service Plan for the area to be annexed be made availableto the public at the first public hearing. . That . plan was made . available at the January 23 hearing. The Service plan is, under the law, a C()htractbetween the City and the area that it annexes. Failure to comply with thatcontl'act (inprovidi11g services) can constitute a basis for dissanexation. The Service Plan presented atthe last hearing included descriptions for generally how .and when services would .\le.provided.. . The .tneth~ timing...and amount of services to be provided have been prepat"ed over the past yearby various City departments. The Service P'lan was intentionally written in general terms due tothe "contract" status of the plan. This allows the . City t() meet the requirements of the Local Government. Code yet reserves some degree of flexibility for the City. Graham Right--of.;Way and Road Annexation The annexation as pro~ takes in only a sttiall portion of Graham Road. This approach was taken tolimittheCity'~liabilityinlightof thecurrellt condition of the road . Additionalroad annexation cannot take place as a ~ofthisactionas the notice requirements of the lawlullve not been met. Additional annexation of the road could occur as part of anyfuture annexation in the area. . Liabilitiesrelate<i to~dconditions would be minimized if such annexation takes place after.theJ:Qadhasbeenreconstruc!e<i.Annexation of the road after reconstruction would notrepresent any ~dditionaloperatin~ cOst to the City as the City haS agreed to maintain the~ entire road. . AnnexatiQnof theroacl. could lead to future capital cost for the City if reconstruction is needed at some later date. Cost:Recovery for Sewer Constroction Several comments were tmlde inop}losition to the concept of any cost recovery for connections tothepro~ newsewerlitle.Staffhasreceivedquestionsand comments about thefaimess of having to pay taxes and pay a .sbal'e of the cost of sewetextension.Current development ordinances and statidardSrequire thatthe ~ofsuchextensions be born by the developer. In any. case, the City Attomey's .Officeshas.advised~mentscould.not be levied against the properties..being.ann~xedl1t1lessanti. untU. the City.etlacts . appropriate. impact . fee ordinances. SeveralcomlI1entsandmquiri~)V~~ made.regarcling the possibility of upgtadingGrahatn Road toa higher..standm-dtha.nthatprgp()S(~(jbythe~lJ11ty. .Arre~ted. $856,288 would. be required tobriIlg thestreet:uPt()~ i~~/)Vi~eclltb~cl. gtltter section. Thatestimateincludes miriimaldrainage improvements, 110$1J.'eCtlighti;Qfsidewalks. . The estimate assumes that the Countywouldstillput $250,000 toward the streetreconstroctionand would provide all rigl1t-of- way. .. . , 'I J" . Fiscal impact analysis of the various alternatives were made and are attached. The net fiscal impact for each scenario have been given above. The .estimated costs and revenues for each scenario are.. given in the attachments. Minor sources of revenue, such as fines andpemrlt fees, were not included in the analysis a'5 they are notanticipatedto be substantial. Additionally, cost and revenues associated with the 293 acreVanReittractswere based pnitscurrent agricultural- open use. Ameaningful fiscal impact analysis of the VanReitpropertyrequires the developers plans. Such analysis can be made when a proposal has been finalized by the developer. In its current use that property would gener-ate very lit1:l~in~ithercostsor revenues. The same holds true for .other agricultural ~ open trac1s included in the third and largest scenario. Staff Recommendations In consideration of the staff findings in.this case, the following recommendations are made: Annexation in response to. the petitions subtnittedshould include all properties described in the proposal presented atthe January 23 . hearing. Theone acre tract located at WellbomandNorthGrahamRoadshouldnotbe annexed at this time.A.tmexation of this tract should occurafter development of the adjacent VanReit property brings services, particularly electrical services, closer to the tract. The staff recommendation included in a report on annexation related easement acquisition was to develop a plan and timetable for additional annexations in this area. Staff recommends that this plan be. developed and that additional annexation in the Graham Road area be considered. Such plan should also address the annexation of the remainder of Graham Road. Direct staff to prepare . the necessary impactfee()rcost. recovery ordinances if Council desires cost recovery on the sewer extensions made fortlrlsannexation.