Bryan Annexation

2,479 Views | 24 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by techno-ag
Finding X
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I live in the area that the City of Bryan intends to annex. As I read through the legalese and try to comprehend it with my simple minded understanding, I'm having trouble understanding why they are skipping over Everything front the current city limits to Knife River and the small community just to the west of them but then reaching into the pockets of everyone else around Rellis. I smell cronyism... How much does it cost to get left out of the land grab?

Greg Abbott signed in a law that is suppose to allow land owners the ability to vote on whether or not they would like to be annexed into a City. Why aren't we being allowed to do that?

Does the COB really expect me to believe that "key growth areas along roadway corridors with high visibility to help prevent poor quality development" means OSR to Thompson Creek but not the land right next to the current area they already control?

Why is the COB and the City council rushing to force this through? We didn't get to vote for them, so they should not have the right to reach in to our pockets without granting a vote. Just because something is "legal" doesn't make it right.

Chris98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe because the area is developing so fast they want to assure that the planning/ zoning are in order (unlike most of the city)
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Please share with us all of this development (other than RELLIS proper)...
Finding X
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rellis is what is developing and if the COB is worried that A&M is going to be using shoddy construction practices - I'm going to call BS!

Sure there will be some development out this way in time, but why SKIP over a certain area to come dig in our pockets years ahead of any real development? If they are going to annex my property and the properties around RELLIS - then they should keep it contiguous and also annex Knife River and all of the property from John Deere to the community west of KR. There is just as much development going on there as there is in the other proposed annex acreage.


There isn't a good reason to dig into the pockets of land owners in that area without us having a say/vote. They say it's in line with the 2040 comprehensive blueprint master plan but it's not mentioned in there that I can find... They talk about fixing the "blighted" areas of Bryan - I guess they are going to force me to pay for it.

Fact is - They weren't looking at this area until Blinn abandoned their last location and partnered with A&M for RELLIS. Now Bryan is abandoning their Blue print to come pick our pockets just because they can. I want a vote. I just want to be heard and not have my private property rights taken/limited.
Justin2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's the way it works. Nobody wants to be annexed. But the city wants both a) the tax money that will occur because of the development around rellis and b) the ability control development and make it more orderly.

Nobody likes it. People always fight it. Most of the time they lose.
woodometer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was discussed at council meetings early on when they were deciding which parcels would be annexed that while Rellis currently has no tax value there soon will be private/public partnership development that will be taxable and apparently very valuable to the city. Follow the money.
Finding X
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sure - Yeah, I get it. I watch as Wellborn was annexed kicking and screaming and knew that was going to be us some day. I just want to be able to vote the way the state of Texas had changed the law to allow... But COB racing to get it done now rather than when the new law goes into effect sucks rocks. And how they selectively exclude areas for some unknown reason...
EMY92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The city doesn't care about making the growth more orderly, they want the tax money, that's why they will skip less desirable areas to get to the desirable ones when annexing.
MaroonBloodedAg2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The area around Knife River is a horrible. No city wants more high crime areas like that.

The City of Bryan should worry about shoddy construction. Everything with TAMU goes to the lowest bidder. A lot of the new buildings are horribly built (ie White Creek Apartments).
VetSurg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was given the choice to accept/decline annexation. Was this option not given to all? Was it reserved for those properties that are designated as "ag usage"?
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MaroonBloodedAg2010 said:

The area around Knife River is a horrible. No city wants more high crime areas like that.

The City of Bryan should worry about shoddy construction. Everything with TAMU goes to the lowest bidder. A lot of the new buildings are horribly built (ie White Creek Apartments).
I wasn't aware the city had the ability to control construction standards at state facilities. That's interesting.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MaroonBloodedAg2010 said:

The area around Knife River is a horrible. No city wants more high crime areas like that.


Some of the Knife River valuations are at 2 and 4 million dollars. Were those included in the annexation, perhaps the city and county law enforcement could address that although perhaps they are already trying.
runnrboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
LOYAL AG said:

MaroonBloodedAg2010 said:

The area around Knife River is a horrible. No city wants more high crime areas like that.

The City of Bryan should worry about shoddy construction. Everything with TAMU goes to the lowest bidder. A lot of the new buildings are horribly built (ie White Creek Apartments).
I wasn't aware the city had the ability to control construction standards at state facilities. That's interesting.
And A&M didn't build White Creek Apartments. This is a public/private partnership with a 30 year lease. http://www.bokapowell.com/project/texas-am-university-white-creek-apartments/. And yes, it's crappy construction and I would guess that once A&M regains control of the buildings (A&M Res Life currently manages the apartments) after the lease is paid off they will just demolish the units, if they last that long. These were also being built at the same time of the west side of Kyle was being rebuilt.
rsa
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Comparing the map above to FEMA maps, the majority of the area the city wants to annex is outside of the 100 year flood zones. Much of the surrounding area is in a 100 year floodplain area. If I were a city planner, I would avoid recommending annexing areas in floodplains.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Negative annexation attitudes led to Bryan not annexing land around TAMU back in the day. Negative attitudes toward growth led to Bryan refusing to consider Post Oak Mall. I think this is a good move by the city to finally get annexation right.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:

Negative annexation attitudes led to Bryan not annexing land around TAMU back in the day. Negative attitudes toward growth led to Bryan refusing to consider Post Oak Mall. I think this is a good move by the city to finally get annexation right.
Damn the torpedoes! Ignore the paid consultants who advised against the annexing that area around RELLIS (were they anti-growth, or just driven by facts?). The annexation of 1999 still has the majority of that land undeveloped, and without city services other than "trash pickup".

But cheerleaders gotta cheerlead...
NRA Life
TSRA Life
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

techno-ag said:

Negative annexation attitudes led to Bryan not annexing land around TAMU back in the day. Negative attitudes toward growth led to Bryan refusing to consider Post Oak Mall. I think this is a good move by the city to finally get annexation right.
Damn the torpedoes! Ignore the paid consultants who advised against the annexing that area around RELLIS (were they anti-growth, or just driven by facts?). The annexation of 1999 still has the majority of that land undeveloped, and without city services other than "trash pickup".

But cheerleaders gotta cheerlead...
Yup. I'll gladly cheer. The so called experts got it wrong in the past, and the rules on annexation are changing. This is a good move for Bryan. Negative Nannies have contributed nothing to Bryan. If nothing else, the city needs more cheerleaders.
Brian Alg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:

Negative annexation attitudes led to Bryan not annexing land around TAMU back in the day. Negative attitudes toward growth led to Bryan refusing to consider Post Oak Mall. I think this is a good move by the city to finally get annexation right.
This is tangential to the Rellis issue, but this reminds me of something that has come up before.

Nancy Berry made this same point when she switched positions on the Wellborn annexation issue years back. I do not understand why people take it as a given that we would all be better off with a single government instead of two municipalities

1. Offering potentially two different styles of governance thus allowing people the option to choose which one they want to live, work, and/or shop in
2. Competing against each other to provide high quality governance
LSCSN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They don't want competition, they want control
bcstx06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:

GSS said:

techno-ag said:

Negative annexation attitudes led to Bryan not annexing land around TAMU back in the day. Negative attitudes toward growth led to Bryan refusing to consider Post Oak Mall. I think this is a good move by the city to finally get annexation right.
Damn the torpedoes! Ignore the paid consultants who advised against the annexing that area around RELLIS (were they anti-growth, or just driven by facts?). The annexation of 1999 still has the majority of that land undeveloped, and without city services other than "trash pickup".

But cheerleaders gotta cheerlead...
Yup. I'll gladly cheer. The so called experts got it wrong in the past, and the rules on annexation are changing. This is a good move for Bryan. Negative Nannies have contributed nothing to Bryan. If nothing else, the city needs more cheerleaders.

Exactly! Preach on! Some people just want Bryan stuck in the past while College Station continues to succeed, attracting all of the middle class from Bryan.

What reputable city do you know of that allows mobile homes scattered throughout neighborhoods? (Nothing against mobile homes) Bryan is trying to fix that. People are fighting.

What reputable citizen would want upper middle class neighborhoods built in their city? Many citizens in Bryan didn't want the city to bring in Tradition. Look how that turned out.

Bryan has a lot of catching up to do and I will be 100% against the people trying to stop it's progress.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I can't quite understand why they want to annex the RELLIS campus itself (as opposed to privately owned land around it.) The majority of the RELLIS campus will not be subject to property tax, since it's state buildings. I imagine the city of Bryan will not have to provide water or sewer (the University has its own systems, and RELLIS has had water and sewer forever), but I would guess it has to provide fire service?

Maybe it's bragging rights, like with the Health Sciences Center? The CoB council made sure that the name Bryan is plastered on that location.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Often found in today's politics is the mindset "if you're not 100% with me, you're 100% against me", which is a ridiculous method to operate with. Ronald Reagan said "a 80% ally is not a 20% traitor".

The consultants the CoB hired made recommendations for extensive annexation, to promote city growth, while trying not to overextend city resources (including the construction of an isolated Fire Station, with minimal benefit to Bryan residents). Based on a few posts here, the recommendations were "anti-Bryan, anti-progress".

The RELLIS area would have remained on the CoB radar for future annexation, and no other entity was going to swoop in and annex it away from Bryan. Meanwhile residents and land owners of the current plan will live in limbo, with services consisting of "trash pickup". But if they want to remodel a bathroom? Re-wire part of your house? Change their type of fence? Better trot down to City Hall, and obtain the required permits.



NRA Life
TSRA Life
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

Often found in today's politics is the mindset "if you're not 100% with me, you're 100% against me", which is a ridiculous method to operate with. Ronald Reagan said "a 80% ally is not a 20% traitor".

The consultants the CoB hired made recommendations for extensive annexation, to promote city growth, while trying not to overextend city resources (including the construction of an isolated Fire Station, with minimal benefit to Bryan residents). Based on a few posts here, the recommendations were "anti-Bryan, anti-progress".

The RELLIS area would have remained on the CoB radar for future annexation, and no other entity was going to swoop in and annex it away from Bryan. Meanwhile residents and land owners of the current plan will live in limbo, with services consisting of "trash pickup". But if they want to remodel a bathroom? Re-wire part of your house? Change their type of fence? Better trot down to City Hall, and obtain the required permits.




The change in rules on annexation forced their hand, from what I understand. Thus the shift from the slow and gradual approach suggested by the consultants.
GSS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
techno-ag said:


The change in rules on annexation forced their hand, from what I understand. Thus the shift from the slow and gradual approach suggested by the consultants.
Umm, you're wrong. The new rules only apply to counties of 500,000 population or more. And it will be a while before Brazos County hits that mark...

Even at the 500k+ level, annexation can go forward, contingent on voter approval.
NRA Life
TSRA Life
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GSS said:

techno-ag said:


The change in rules on annexation forced their hand, from what I understand. Thus the shift from the slow and gradual approach suggested by the consultants.
Umm, you're wrong. The new rules only apply to counties of 500,000 population or more. And it will be a while before Brazos County hits that mark...

Even at the 500k+ level, annexation can go forward, contingent on voter approval.
Aha, I found what I vaguely remember reading about the change in rules.

https://www.theeagle.com/news/local/bryan-city-council-votes-to-move-forward-with-annexation-plans/article_3a351c54-f263-5286-8c78-00fea1e99903.amp.html
Quote:

The decision came on the first day of the 86th session of the Texas Legislature, which marks a period of uncertainty over whether lawmakers will seek to limit cities' annexation abilities. This, along with a desire to guide development in what's expected to soon be an urbanized area of the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction thanks to the RELLIS Campus, has been mentioned by staff and council members as motivators for annexation.
Still thinking it's a good decision.
Page 1 of 1
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.