Bryan City Council Reverses Direction And Will Pursue City Initiated Annexation

philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Looks like City of Bryan is going to do a land grab, right after they said they wouldn't. Merry Christmas to everyone on the West side of Bryan that has enjoyed living in the county, looks like you will be city by next Christmas.

Ironically looking at the maps the recommended area, doesn't include the poor heavier density area on the east side of Higgs. That is because it would cost them $ to fix that sewer plant. This is purely to grab taxes from people on small acreage 1-5 acres that they don't have to do much for in exchange. And to do it before the legislature might make it harder in the future. The recommended area doesn't even include RELLIS (that is an option of one.)

"In September, the Bryan city council decided not to pursue city initiated annexation on the west side of town, including the RELLIS campus.
The council changed its mind this week, directing staff to begin the process of Bryan's first unilateral annexation since 1999.
There are two targeted areas, from RELLIS south along the east side of Highway 47 to the College Station city limitsand north of town around the city owned Texas Triangle business park.
Deputy city manager Joey Dunn brought up the possibility the state legislature next year might make it tougher for Bryan to do future annexations.
Dunn also said there was time to complete the annexation process before the legislature could enact new laws.
Dunn pointed out up to half the land in both areas targeted for annexation might not be annexed. That's because it's agriculture land, and state law allows those property owners the option whether to accept the annexation."

http://2o9kb51xfph91b7rki281uu9.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/BryCoun121118annex.pdf

techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
On the other hand they'll be able to control growth and put a fire station out there.
halibut sinclair
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LSCSN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
remember wellborn
Dark Helmet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They should have incorporated first. It's your own fault if you get annexed.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dark Helmet said:

They should have incorporated first. It's your own fault if you get annexed.
It's not easy to incorporate if you're in the ETJ, even if they wanted to.
JAS61
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Have never figured out why a city should be able to legally annex an area without the consent of a majority of the landowners.
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is a possibility that they will have to ask landowners in the future depending on what passes with the next legislative session. That is why they are fast tracking this when 2 months ago they said they were not going to.
agnerd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They should be required to extend water, sanitary, and fire and police service out to an area BEFORE being able to annex it.
Nealthedestroyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm interested in how far that Coulter Field bubble extends...
Rexter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is the potential annexation a limited purpose, so the city skates on services?
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:

On the other hand they'll be able to control growth and put a fire station out there.
"Out there" being RELLIS, while the majority of the annexed area doesn't see city services or infrastructure improvements for decades, just the bureaucracy oversight.

And having your garbage picked up should not qualify as a basis for annexation..
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the cities don't want interference from the state legislature, don't create city limit maps that look like they were drawn by a three-year old. Common "cause and effect" situation, where laws are needed only due to irrational actions.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

If the cities don't want interference from the state legislature, don't create city limit maps that look like they were drawn by a three-year old. Common "cause and effect" situation, where laws are needed only due to irrational actions.
Growth is inevitable. It's one of those things when you've got a world class university next door. Just sayin'.
oklaunion
How long do you want to ignore this user?
agnerd said:

They should be required to extend water, sanitary, and fire and police service out to an area BEFORE being able to annex it.
Won't happen. In CS, the houses off of Barron, west of Fitch, don't have sanitary sewer, despite being annexed back in the 90s.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:

GSS said:

If the cities don't want interference from the state legislature, don't create city limit maps that look like they were drawn by a three-year old. Common "cause and effect" situation, where laws are needed only due to irrational actions.
Growth is inevitable. It's one of those things when you've got a world class university next door. Just sayin'.
Has anyone stated they were "anti-growth"? Or has it simply been pointed out that cities often do not have a plan to provide what is legally required for annexed areas? And ignore paid consultations who advise against such actions?
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

techno-ag said:

GSS said:

If the cities don't want interference from the state legislature, don't create city limit maps that look like they were drawn by a three-year old. Common "cause and effect" situation, where laws are needed only due to irrational actions.
Growth is inevitable. It's one of those things when you've got a world class university next door. Just sayin'.
Has anyone stated they were "anti-growth"? Or has it simply been pointed out that cities often do not have a plan to provide what is legally required for annexed areas? And ignore paid consultations who advise against such actions?
Can't say I agree with you. I think having the city limits out there now will help as growth continues in the future. RELLIS is kind of a big deal. For the city to just ignore the area, as you seem to be suggesting, is a bad idea imo.

And give Bryan a break. They haven't annexed anything in years. They're nowhere near as land greedy as CStat has been in recent memory.
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Especially when there are multiple trash services to choose from in that area. Not any cheaper to pay BTU than BAGS or Brazos Valley Recycling.

Plus one of the options is just annexing the area around Leonard and Jones. What has that have to do with RELLIS?
Honestly I could see directly around RELLIS and hwy 21. That area of larger acreage is more likely to develop than smaller house lots like on Charolette that are already built out.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"And give Bryan a break. They haven't annexed anything in years."

Not true, they have annexed a lot of land, via request and agreement. This will be the first initiated by CoB since 1999 (and a lot of that land still does not have city services, nor any plans to do so).

Avoidance of the issues and obligations of annexation doesn't make them go away...
AggiePhil
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Looks good to me.
Nealthedestroyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

"And give Bryan a break. They haven't annexed anything in years."

Not true, they have annexed a lot of land, via request and agreement. This will be the first initiated by CoB since 1999 (and a lot of that land still does not have city services, nor any plans to do so).

Avoidance of the issues and obligations of annexation doesn't make them go away...



Is there any legal precedent for suing the county or city for not supplying the services promised by annexation?
woodiewood1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The percentage of property taxes assessed should be based on the percentage of city services provided.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

"And give Bryan a break. They haven't annexed anything in years."

Not true, they have annexed a lot of land, via request and agreement. This will be the first initiated by CoB since 1999 (and a lot of that land still does not have city services, nor any plans to do so).

Avoidance of the issues and obligations of annexation doesn't make them go away...
Eh. Bryan has always been plagued by anti-growth negative Nancies. They kept Post Oak Mall away back in the day and you still see them griping about Traditions and getting all in a tizzy over the redevelopment of the old golf course.

It's been as you pointed out almost 20 years since they annexed anything besides small chunks on request. This is a good move. Of course they should annex the area around RELLIS now that it's growing. I commend current and recent councils for getting so much done despite the short sighted opposition they've faced.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deflection (an art form for some..), labels, ignoring commitments.

Some are such good, loyal cheerleaders....a "Mika" comment might apply.
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you look at the actual plan recommendation from staff it doesn't include RELLIS. RELLIS is only in one of the alternate plans. The staff recommended area and alternate 1 doesn't has not much to do with the area around RELLIS as to take over over extra property.
Also, if you look at the staff recommended area it actually specifically goes around an area with a bunch of mobile homes and a waste water treatment plant that would cost a lot of money to fix. So of course they will try to get around that area so they don't have to spend money. Plus to avoid the over 99 residence rule.
There is nothing the city will provide that county residents don't already have. (Fire is provided by ESD4, sheriff for police.) I specifically asked about waste water in regards to some of the 1999 annexation and was told that they don't have to provide a waste water line to the property border. It is just permission, at the owners cost to tap in to the closest city line, which could be over a mile away.
If they really care then let all properties have an option for a non-annexation agreement, not just those with over 6 acres with ag. Some areas under 5 acres are being utilized for ag purposes just Brazos county has a min acreage to be exempt for property.
threecatcorner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What is the Over 99 Residence Rule?
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Basically if the are annexing less than 100 residences at a time they don't need landowers permission to annex. At least that is my understanding of it.
TLIAC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Is this the same area that the consulting firm they hired recommended that they not annex?
threecatcorner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That sucks. They should still need permission even if it's less than 100.
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, this is the area the consultant didn't recommend annexing at this time. To let small areas of annexation to eventually get there was the recommendation.

After actually listening to the city council workshop online, I am corrected that the area they are waiting to annex is alternate #2 which would be RELLIS, the land around RELLIS and another strip of land east of the land they already annexed along Hwy 47 going down to Leonard Road. Over 7 square miles.

The reason they want to do this now is because with the current legislature there could be changes that would get rid of the less than 100 residences rule and they would have to ask landowners permission to annex, so now they are trying to do it before they have to ask permission. One council member in the workshop even said "Let annex as much as we can." So this is just a land grab, pure and simple.

They annexed along Hwy 47 because of the biotech corridor that was going to be big development due to the TAMU HSC building going in. Really how much develop has gone in along 47 in the last 20 years? Still alot of cows grazing those properties so what taxes have been collected? Property has been for sale for years along Hwy 47.




VetSurg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Confused as to whether my land is proposed for annexation or not.
philothea
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Where is your land? The only way to know for sure is to keep an eye on your mailbox since they will send letters to owners if the city approves the staff's plan at the city council meeting on Jan 8th. Which listening to the workshop onlineunkess something weird comes up I would see as a guarantee.
bcstx06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm for the annexation. Let Bryan grow and be great! It's already behind and trying to catch up.
VetSurg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
philothea said:

Where is your land? The only way to know for sure is to keep an eye on your mailbox since they will send letters to owners if the city approves the staff's plan at the city council meeting on Jan 8th. Which listening to the workshop onlineunkess something weird comes up I would see as a guarantee.
On 21 directly across from Knife River.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Annexation plan
The link from the first post is very helpful.

The "Alternative 2" RELLIS area would extend west down Hwy 21 to the Little Brazos River. That the CoB would be able to provide anything akin to city services is simply not going to happen (history proves that). As mentioned earlier, crazy city limit maps are what cause the TX Legislature to clamp down on ridiculous annexations.

Annex areas that can be serviced within a reasonable time, alone (CoB), or with developers. Proceed prudently, not because "we can". That paid consultant may be worth listening to...
Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.