Title
Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act the Request by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., on Behalf of Haggard Enterprises, Ltd. on a Petition to Annex Approximately 67 Acres, Located on the South Side of F.M. 1461 and Approximately 1,400 Feet East of F.M. 2478 (Custer Road), and Accompanying Ordinance
Summary
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2010
DEPARTMENT: Development Services
CONTACT: Jennifer Cox, AICP, Director of Planning
Michael Quint, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
• Conduct the third of three public hearings regarding a voluntary petition for annexation and approval of the annexation request and accompanying ordinance.
• In accordance with the Texas Local Government Code, the City Council held the first public hearing at a special City Council meeting on October 19, 2010 and the second public hearing was held at the regular October 19, 2010 City Council meeting.
• This request for annexation is being considered concurrently with a proposed zoning request and a developer’s agreement.
ITEM SUMMARY:
• The applicant has submitted a petition for voluntary annexation to the City of McKinney for an approximately 67.22 acre tract of land. The subject property is located east of the southeast corner of Custer Road and F.M. 1461.
• The subject property is located in the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) of the City of McKinney. The purpose of the ETJ is to promote and protect the general health, safety and welfare of persons residing in and adjacent to the municipalities.
• The Subdivision Ordinance applies to properties within the ETJ; the Zoning Ordinance does not.
• The subject property is located within the Prosper Independent School District. Prosper ISD has been informed of the proposed annexation.
• The subject property, if annexed, will be zoned pursuant to a pending rezoning request (04-411Z) that is being considered concurrently by the City Council.
• The proposed rezoning request associated with this proposed annexation (04-441Z) includes the subject property and an additional 67.22 acre tract located on the southeast corner of FM 1461 and Custer Road. The applicant is requesting the subject property and the adjacent western property (134.44 total gross acres) be zoned for single family residential uses and retail/commercial uses.
• Because this annexation is at the request of the property owner, the developer of the subject property will be responsible for extending adequate infrastructure to the subject property as the property is developed.
• Staff and the applicant began working to draft a developer’s agreement to deal with the provision of services and mitigate anticipated possible costs to the City associated with the proposed annexation. This agreement is being considered concurrently by the City Council.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Annexation and City Services.
• Due to the fact that the proposed annexation is voluntary, the City can annex the land even though it is not currently on the annexation plan (Texas Local Government Code §43.052 (h) (2)).
• The subject property that is proposed to be annexed is unpopulated.
• The McKinney Fire Department currently provides fire and medical emergency services in this area. Currently, police response is from Collin County. The Texas Local Government Code stipulates that police and fire services must be provided immediately upon annexation (Texas Local Government Code §43.056).
• The Texas Local Government Code stipulates that solid waste collection must be provided immediately upon annexation (Texas Local Government Code §43.056).
2. Public Improvements.
• All necessary public improvements will be required at time of platting, unless specified in an approved facilities agreement.
• The pending developer’s agreement specifies that upon development of the subject property, the applicant will be required to satisfy the requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances.
• The pending developer’s agreement includes a provision requiring the payment of a proportionality fee, which represents a roughly proportional amount necessary to offset the roadway infrastructure capacity needs of the subject property.
• This fee should be the same amount as the roadway impact fee assessed in the adjacent roadway impact fee service area.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
• Annexation of additional property has financial implications for the City.
• Although the developer will be responsible for upgrading roads and extending utilities as development occurs, the long-term maintenance of these facilities will be the City’s responsibility.
• The ISO rating determines insurance rates in McKinney. Poor availability of water resources in proposed annexed areas could have a negative impact on ISO ratings.
• An ISO rating is based on a 105 point system:
o 40 points for water system (supply, distribution, fire flow, hydrants, maintenance, etc.),
o 50 points for evaluation of the Fire Department itself,
o 10 points for alarm systems, and
o 5 points for code enforcement, plan review, etc.
• The effects of additional annexation on ISO ratings are cumulative. The City of McKinney’s current ISO rating is 2 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best and 10 being the worst (Plano has a rating of 1; Allen has a rating of 2). The latest evaluation was conducted in 2009. Typically, evaluations are conducted every 10-15 years.
• The Fire Department has indicated that the proposed annexation request may have the potential for a negative impact upon the City’s ISO rating. There will be extended response time to citizens living within the area to be annexed. The Fire Department has also indicated that the current water supply may impact fire fighting capabilities, and current road infrastructure may add to response times.
• Annexed parcels are subject to City property tax. This tract may currently have an agricultural valuation classification with Collin Central Appraisal District (CCAD). An agricultural exemption is given to properties in active agricultural uses, which allows the property to have a lower appraisal value and thus, lower taxes. When property with an agricultural exemption is developed, it is subject to rollback taxes for each of the previous five years. As such, the owner would be required to pay County, ISD, and City taxes which had been exempted during that five-year period. Whenever this proposed tract is developed, the City would receive rollback taxes if the property has such an exemption.
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION:
• During the first consideration of the proposed voluntary annexation, Council Member Kever indicated that the subject property appeared to be close to where a future fire station was being proposed and asked if the applicant would be willing to dedicate land to the City of McKinney for a future fire station.
• Prior to the second consideration of the proposed voluntary annexation, the Planning Department’s Staff met with the applicant to discuss possible sites for a future fire station. At that time, a piece of property, approximately 4 acres in size, located approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of F.M. 2478 (Custer Road) and F.M. 1461 was discussed.
• Subsequent to the second consideration of the proposed voluntary annexation, the Planning Department’s Staff discussed this possible future fire station site with the Fire Chief, Mark Wallace. Chief Wallace indicated that he does not believe the proposed property will work for a fire station due to the shape of the parcel. The proposed site is elongated and irregularly shaped and will make the needed footprint, orientation and apparatus turning radii difficult.
• The Chief went on the state that if another fire station is constructed closer to where the facilities master plan indicates (over 1 mile south and east of the subject property), that fire station and the possible fire station on the subject property would be too close together. If a fire station is built on the proposed location instead of the location shown on the facilities master plan, it would negatively impact coverage within the city to the south and east.
• Subsequent to the Council discussion on the proposed annexation, Staff also discussed these issues with the applicant in more depth. Currently, the applicant has not formally agreed to dedicate any land to the City as part of this annexation request. The applicant should be present at the November 16, 2010 City Council meeting to answer any questions.