R2017-174 2017-08-31RESOLUTION NO. R2017-174
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pearland, Texas, directing
staff to prepare annexation service plans for Areas "I," "L" and "P." Area
"I" being comprised of approximately 344 acres located north of Southbelt
Industrial Drive, west of Almeda School Road, south of Beltway 8, and east
of FM 521; Area "L" being comprised of approximately 1,002 acres located
northeast of SH35, between Dixie Farm Road and County Road 129; and
Area "P" being comprised of approximately 277 acres located just south of
Magnolia Road, just north of Bailey Road, west of Manvel Road, and east of
Webber Drive and Deerbrook Court.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby directs staff to prepare service plans for the
proposed annexation of the areas more particularly depicted in Exhibits "A", attached hereto.
PASSED. APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 31st day of August, A.D., 2017.
ATTEST:
Y• NG LQ`RFING
Y SE ETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DARRIN M. COKER
CITY ATTORNEY
TOM REID
MAYOR
x
m
0,
0
r
c
m
x 0
3 z
l z
.O
D X
N
O
v
v
•A
SECTION 2: GROWTH CAPACITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
The City can consider how well it is applying the
Principles of Smart Growth identified by the Smart
Growth Network, recognizing that Pearland may just
be reaching a point of maturity in some aspects of
its growth and development progression for certain
principles to even be relevant or attainable locally.
Pearland can also identify and apply measurable
indicators as benchmarks for tracking progress on
each of the principles as illustrated in Table 2.1,
Smart Growth Principles. Additional resource
publications include: Smart Growth Audits (American
Planning Association, PAS Report 512); Jobs -Housing
Balance (APA, PAS Report 516); and Getting to Smart
Growth: 100 Strategies for Implementation (Smart
Growth Network and ICMA, publication 02-202).
ACTION: ACCOMMODATION OF "GREEN"
BUILDING PRACTICES
Pearland should continue to monitor trends and best
practices in the building code, land development,
and public facilities arenas related to "green"
building and operational standards (including for
energy efficiency; water conservation, capture, and
re -use; waste reduction and recycling, etc.) to ensure
that the City's codes and policies promote and do
not discourage such activity locally. The National
Green Building Program sponsored by the National
Association of Home Builders is an important
information clearinghouse, along with other
governmental and non-profit resources. Additionally,
the Texas Gulf Coast Chapter of the U.S. Green
Building Council, based in Houston (www.usgbc-
houston.org), provides a regional forum for public
and private sector coordination and information
exchange.
Annexation
Outlook
This section considers the potential
extent and timing of future
annexation of areas currently in the
City's extraterritorial jurisdiction
(ETJ) and the associated rationale.
This information is included in the
Comprehensive Plan for general
planning purposes only. More
detailed study and planning would
be necessary to satisfy statutory
requirements and procedures for
initiating specific annexations as
contained in Chapter 43, Municipal Annexation, of
the Texas Local Government Code.
In conjunction with the City's Land Use Plan map (in
Section 7, Land Use and Character), Thoroughfare
Plan map (in Section 3, Mobility), and the outlook
for utility infrastructure extensions and upgrades
summarized in this plan section (with more detail in
the 2013 update of the City's Water and Wastewater
Impact Fee Report and related master plans), this
information provides a broad overview of where and
when Pearland might grow and extend municipal
services beyond its current City limits.
ANNEXATION FACTORS
Compiled in the list below are five major factors that
typically enter into decisions to annex certain ETJ
areas sooner than later, or to defer annexation in some
locations until later, if ever. Under each major factor
are related considerations. Beyond this list, other
intangibles include consideration of the potential
degree of contention and opposition that particular
annexation initiatives may provoke, plus the basic
capacity o= City officials and staff — in a large, rapidly -
growing community — to devote the necessary time
and effort that annexation proceedings require.
1. Fiscal
• Value added relative to cost to serve (based on
various factors including land use)
• Municipal Utility District (MUD) debt/timing
(a potential annexation date for each MUD in
the City's ETJ can be projected based on when
each district's outstanding debt will be paid off
as summarized in Table 2.2, Annexation of
MUDs in ETJ).
TABLE 2.2, Annexation of MUDS in ETJ
Source: City of Pearland Finance Department
Note: Dates are based on the timing of when all MUD debt will be paid off.
Municipal Utility
District (MUD)
MUD 2
Potential Date
of Annexation
After 02/01/2017
Potential to Issue
More Debt
MUD 3
After 09/01/2020
MUD6
After 09/01/2024
MUD 21
After 09/01/2039
No
No
No
Yes
MUD 22
Not yet issued any debt
but will in the future
Yes
r-T•Z' • • • = • 201
2.29
2.30 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 21, 2015
2. Service Provision
• Proximity to current incorporated area
• Feasibility and realistic timing of service
extension — and whether City prefers to be the
service provider
• Extent of existing population/development
• Already providing certain municipal services to
area (and ETJ residents already benefitting from
use of in -City streets, parks, etc.)
• Other service providers
• Health/safety (housing/building conditions,
sanitation, emergency response)
3. Growth
• Proximity to current incorporated area
• Available/developable land (including for
schools, parks, other public facilities) without
significant constraints or legacy issues (e.g.,
unplanned development, brownfields, etc.)
• Market/development community interest and/
or economic development potential
• Already planned facility/service extensions
4. Other Community Objectives
• Orderly growth progression and effective land
use management in prime areas and corridors
• Land use compatibility and quality (including
to protect nearby in -City neighborhoods and
developed areas)
• Resource protection (e.g., floodplains, well
fields, creek corridors)
• Asset protection and area planning (e.g., airport
vicinity)
• Community image/aesthetics (e.g., gateways,
corridors)
• Amenity acquisition or future potential
5. Statutory / Strategic
• Ease of annexation (especially the Chapter 43
exemption, from the three-year annexation
process, of areas with 99 or fewer tracts
where each tract has one or more residential
dwellings)
• Strategic or "defensive" annexations to set the
stage for future actions and/or prevent potential
adverse actions by other nearby cities
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION PHASING
Displayed in Map 2.2, Potential Annexation
Phasing, are the results from a general evaluation
of ETJ areas eligible for potential annexation and
related discussions between City and consultant
personnel that touched on many of the factors
itemized above. Based on this assessment, 19
areas (labeled "A" through "S" on the map) were
classified as appropriate for potential annexation in
one of three timeframes, subject in all cases to more
detailed and area -specific study and deliberation by
City officials, staff and other stakeholders:
• Short Term (0-5 years)
• Medium Term (5-10 years)
• Long Term (10+ years)
It should be noted that the timing is meant to convey
when annexation proceedings might be initiated but
not necessarily completed. Also, while each area
is identified for a particular timeframe, this does
not mean that all of the land within an area would
necessarily be annexed at that time given the more
detailed area -specific analysis that will occur before
any final decisions.
As displayed on Map 2.2 and in the accompanying
Table 2.3, Primary Factors in Potential Annexation
Phasing:
• The Short Term category includes eight areas, A
through H, that account for nearly 10 percent of
the ETJ (1,317 acres and 2.1 square miles).
• The Medium Term category includes four areas,
I through L, that encompass 25 percent of the
ETJ (3,458 acres and 5.4 square miles).
• The Long Term category has the seven
remaining areas, M through S, which together
are 65 percent of the ETJ (8,939 acres and 14
square miles).
To elaborate on the summary presentation in Table
2.3, below is a compilation of the primary factors
considered in classifying each of the 19 areas,
recognizing that lesser considerations in other or
all five of the "annexation factor" categories might
apply in some cases. In general, more checkmarks
for a particular area in Table 2.3 suggests more — or
more significant — reasons for expediting possible
annexation in either the Short or Medium Term
relative to areas in the Long Term category.
AREA
Fiscal
Service
Provision
Growth
Other
Community
Objectives
Statutory /
Strategic
SHORT TERM (0 - 5 YEARS)
A
B
c
✓
✓
✓
D
E
✓
✓
F
G
H
SECTION 2: GROWTH CAPACITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TABLE 2.3, Primary Factors in Potential Annexation Phasing (in conjunction with Map 2.2)
1
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
a
R
S
✓
✓
LONG TERM (10+ YEARS)
✓
✓
✓
✓
2.32 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 21, 2015
SHORT TERM
AREA A
• Adjacent to planned subdivisions with premier
high value residential areas
AREA B (portion of Area 4 from 2009-2010 initiated
by the City)
• Includes new City water plant (required tie-ins
within 1,000 feet of City service)
• Intersection of County Roads 48 and 59 (Minor
Retail Node on Land Use Plan, current vacant
property on northwest and northeast corners)
• Protection of nearby in -City areas (Southern
Trails)
• <100 residential parcels
AREA C
• Vacant land
• Protection of nearby in -City areas (Country
Place)
• Proximity to Clear Creek (potential trailhead
location) and Torn Bass Regional Park
AREA D
• Located within the Magnolia Corridor Overlay
District
• Surrounded by planned subdivisions and in
close proximity to three schools on Manvel
Road
AREA E (Area 1 from 2009-2010 planning)
• Importance of Bailey Road corridor and related
street improvements
• Land use management along north Bailey Road
frontage within ETJ
• Intersection of Bailey Road and Cullen Parkway
(Minor Retail Node on Land Use Plan)
• <100 residential parcels
AREA F (Area 2 from 2009-2010 planning)
• Importance of Bailey Road corridor and related
street improvements
• Land use management along south Bailey Road
frontage within ETJ (with current City limits on
north side)
• Intersections of Bailey with Manvel and Harkey
Roads (Minor Retail Nodes on Land Use Plan)
• <100 residential parcels
AREA G
• Vacant land
• Development potential with transition of
Massey Ranch property
AREA H
• Largely in regional storm water detention and
open space near Dixie Farm Road
MEDIUM TERM
AREA I
• Existing and potential additional industrial
development (some vacant property)
• City water service extensions
• East -west roadway improvements on
Thoroughfare Plan
• Tollway / Beltway 8 proximity
AREA J
• Significant existing commercial development
• Strategic location and high-profile area of city
• MUD debt / timing considerations (2, 3, 6)
AREA K (Area 5 from 2009-2010 planning)
• Interim services agreement in place
• Industrial focus on Land Use Plan (extraction
activity in meantime)
• Dixie Farm Road extension on Thoroughfare
Plan
• Eventual extension and improvement of County
Road 129 and link across Main St/SH 35 to
County Road 128 (Hastings Cannon Road) on
Thoroughfare Plan
• City gateway factor (along with Area L) behind
Main St/SH 35 frontage already in city
AREA L (portion of Area 6 from 2009-2010 initiated
by the City)
• Pearland Regional Airport and vicinity to south
(airport protection/buffering and economic
development potential)
• Industrial focus toward Main St/SH 35 on Land
Use Plan
• Pearland Parkway eventual extension on
Thoroughfare Plan
• East -west Zink across Main St/SH 35 involving
County Roads 414 and 130 on Thoroughfare
Plan (airport access)
SECTION 2: GROWTH CAPACITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
• Extension and improvement of County
Road 129 and link across Main St/SH 35 to
County Road 128 (Hastings Cannon Road) on
Thoroughfare Plan
• City gateway factor (along with Area K) behind
Main St/SH 35 frontage already in city
LONG TERM
AREA M
• Legacy of scattered residential development
with uncoordinated platting and street network,
not up to in -City standards
• Necessary upgrades to streets/infrastructure
and other public service challenges (fiscal
factor)
• Predominantly Low Density Residential on Land
Use Plan
• Limited City interest in FM 521 frontage
• MUD debt / timing considerations in southern
portion toward SH 6 (21, 22 - Lakes of Savannah)
AREA N
• All public land managed by Harris County (Tom
Bass Regional Park)
AREA 0
• Previously disannexed
• Minimal vacant land with park and storm water
detention areas plus low density residential use
• MUD debt / timing considerations (16)
AREA P
• Existing low-density residential development
with same designation on Land Use Plan (fiscal
factor)
• Minimal vacant land
AREA C2
• Existing low-density residential development
with same designation on Land Use Plan (fiscal
factor)
• Only some scattered vacant properties
AREA R
• Isolated property at edge of city amid low-
density residential use
AREA S (portion of Area 6 from 2009-2010 initiated
by the City)
• Largely existing low-density residential
development with same designation north of
airport on Land Use Plan (fiscal factor)
• Only some scattered vacant properties
ANNEXATION POLICIES
The written policy statements below may be used by
City officials and staff as a guide and reference when
making decisions regarding potential annexation
activity or related growth guidance measures.
FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE
1. All annexation decisions should require fiscal
impact assessments to determine that the
annexation is fiscally responsible from the
perspective of City operations, maintenance,
capital investments, and debt.
2. The City should not annex special districts,
such as municipal utility districts (e.g., MUDs)
until the district's debt is paid off and/or the
economic benefits outweigh the immediate
and long-term costs of assuming the district's
debt and providing municipal services. The
City can negotiate a schedule to establish a
future plan for voluntary annexation.
3. When an annexation is not fiscally feasible, the
City should consider service agreements in lieu
of annexation agreements to extend aspects
of the City's regulatory authority without
committing to provision of full City services or
transrer of debt.
EFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE
4. The City should avoid strip and piecemeal.
annexations given the potential high cost
of extending services in such situations.
Annexations can be used in a strip or
piecemeal nature to establish the contiguity
necessary for eventual expansion into strategic
areas if there is a Tong -term plan to annex the
unincorporated, "passed over" land.
5. Wherever possible, existing infrastructure
systems in areas proposed for annexation
should have near or fully adequate capacities
to accommodate current and projected
development demands in such areas without
the City bearing an inordinate burden for
capital investment in the near or longer term.
6. To maximize the use and efficiency of
existing City infrastructure, growth should
first be directed toward vacant parcels and
Pat ' 201
2.33
2.34 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 21, 2015
underutilized lands within the City limits before
extensive development is considered or
encouraged within future growth areas beyond
the City limits.
7. The City should promote reuse and/or
redevelopment of obsolete, vacant buildings
and underutilized properties to maximize
the efficiencies of existing infrastructure and
municipal services, along with the overall
community and tax base benefits of restoring
such properties to productive use.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
8. Annexation decisions should be consistent
with the economic development objectives of
the City as stated in this Comprehensive Plan
and the Pearland 20/20 Strategic Plan.
9. Annexation agreements and voluntary ETJ
agreements should be used as tools to secure
the City's long-term jurisdictional interests
and protect its growth trajectory and future
development options in the ETJ.
QUALITY DEVELOPMENT
10. The City should prioritize annexations in highly
visible areas at community gateways and along
key corridors to ensure sound regulation of the
type, pattern, and quality of development.
11. The City should weigh the intangible benefits
of annexation and the possible costs of
inaction, such as potential lost opportunities
to extend the City's proposed zoning authority
to undeveloped areas where growth is
anticipated.
12. The City should use development agreements
and/or strategic partnership agreements as a
negotiation tool to increase the quality of site
and building design, when appropriate.
13. Annexation should occur in strict compliance
with the policies and planning guidance in this
Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Land Use
Plan and Thoroughfare Plan.
COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIPS
14. Annexation and strategic partnership
agreements should be used as vehicles to
partner with and mutually define growth
objectives with private landowners to ensure
land is devoted to its highest and best use
whenever possible, along with consideration of
other community objectives and priorities.
15. The City should consider entering into
interlocal agreements to facilitate ETJ
boundary adjustments with adjacent
municipalities in exchange for areas of
strategic importance and equivalent value (i.e.,
"ETJ swaps"), when appropriate.
ANNEXATION PARAMETERS
Given the amount of territory already included within
Peariand's corporate limits (roughly 46 square miles),
the City has the ability to add considerable acreage
through annexation where desired and feasible.
As specified in Chapter 43 of the Texas Local
Government Code, in any given year the City may
annex a quantity of acreage that is equivalent to up
to 10 percent of its current incorporated land area
(i.e., approximately 4.6 square miles). If it does not
annex all of the land that is allowed, the difference
rolls over to the next year. The City can make two
such rollovers, meaning it can annex up to 30 percent
of its land area in a single year (i.e., nearly 14 square
miles currently).
The flip side of this opportunity is that, even more
so since Chapter 43 was significantly amended in
1999, Texas annexation statutes impose stringent
standards for extending municipal services to newly -
annexed areas in a timely and adequate manner,
which must be comparable to pre-existing services
and service levels in similar incorporated areas.
Growth Guidance Tools
Cities have an array of strategies for influencing the
location, pattern and timing of development. Some
methods simply aim to minimize the adverse effects
of growth without affecting its direction or the nature
of the development. Other techniques allow a city
to guide and shape growth more directly. Given the
limitations of Texas enabling laws for city and county
government, there are few, if any, mechanisms
currently available to entirely prevent scattered or
"leapfrog" development trends, particularly within
a City's ETJ. Instead, Texas cities are faced with a
complex set of rules regarding their ability to manage
all aspects of future growth and development. While
there are some ways to better manage peripheral
development, there are also factors over which
the City has little control (e.g., no building permit
requirements or code enforcement in the ETJ).
Within this context, it is wise for Pearland to consider
ways in which it can exert more influence over the
direction, timing, pattern, and quality of fringe
development that it ultimately must serve. The intent
1 ma aiMMIMEN.11