Sugar Land And The Woodlands Part Of Houston

[clutchcity123]

one day will sugarland and the woodlands be houston

[lowspark]

I don't know about the woodlands, but Sugar Land is an incorporated city (like Bellaire or West U) so it can't be incorporated into Houston.

[kjb434]

Most of the large existing fort bend neighborhoods are in currently incorporated cities.

Same with Brazoria county also.

The woodlands can be incorporated though.

[houstonsemipro]

The Woodlands will be in 2011.

[kjb434]

It's not definite though. 2011 is just the date the annexation process begins. It takes three years and leave room for citizen opposition. If the woodland's citizens are organized enough, it may not happen.

[swzine]

It's not definite though.  2011 is just the date the annexation process begins.  It takes three years and leave room for citizen opposition.  If the woodland's citizens are organized enough, it may not happen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As far as I know one part of Sugar Land (New Territory I believe) was once part of Houston's ETJ (extra-territorial jurisdiction), meaning that it could one day become part of Houston. The residents voted to leave Houston's ETJ and become part of Sugar Land's ETJ. If anyone knows more about this - especially if they can support this, since I'm not 100% positive, please jump in. I know it happened, just not positive New Territory was the place.

The ETJ is basically an area in the outskirts of a city that is not part of the city, but receives some city services, and that could one day (and probably will) become part of the city. I think the annexation is usually considered once the MUD bonds are paid down low enough. Right now the City of Sugar Land seems to have an open offer on the table for all of the places in it's ETJ to begin annexing to Sugar Land, but only Avalon has responded. (http://ci.sugar-land.tx.us/content/Annexation.htm)

[swzine]

As far as I know one part of Sugar Land (New Territory I believe) was once part of Houston's ETJ (extra-territorial jurisdiction), meaning that it could one day become part of Houston.  The residents voted to leave Houston's ETJ and become part of Sugar Land's ETJ.  If anyone knows more about this - especially if they can support this, since I'm not 100% positive, please jump in.  I know it happened, just not positive New Territory was the place.

The ETJ is basically an area in the outskirts of a city that is not part of the city, but receives some city services, and that could one day (and probably will) become part of the city.  I think the annexation is usually considered once the MUD bonds are paid down low enough.  Right now the City of Sugar Land seems to have an open offer on the table for all of the places in it's ETJ to begin annexing to Sugar Land, but only Avalon has responded.  (http://ci.sugar-land.tx.us/content/Annexation.htm)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, a quick search helped me find that someone on here already backed me up on this one, before I ever posted! http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...?showtopic=3223

bobby123:

"For instance, New territory in Sugar Land used to be within Houston ETJ; however, the postal address is actually saying the City of Sugar Land. Everntally, through local politics, it now legitimately falls into the ETJ of Sugar Land."

[RedScare]

From the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M:

"2/3/2004 Sugar Land studying annexation policies and plans

Officials in the city of Sugar Land say the look to draft an annexation policy that would protect the interests of current citizens while laying a clear path allowing areas such as New Territory and Greatwood to join the city. The city is in the midst of drafting such a policy, and following a City County workshop, one proposal will be fielded to the various communities within Sugar Land

[C2H]

No! No! No! Houston does not need to annex any more land. Houston is already like one giant blob. Why is Houston the only major city that seems like it can't put an end to endless sprawl within the city limits and allow the suburbs to grow out more and gain an identitity for themselves, separate from Houston. The Woodlands should remain The Woodlands and Houston remain Houston. The larger the city is, the more difficult it will be to manage anyway.

[RedScare]

The city's official policy is that it has no annexation plans in the near future. I don't think the city is interested in the Woodlands. Too many bonds to pay off, plus it is too far away. The only part the city would be interested in is the mall anyway. They don't want the residences.

I don't know why any self respecting Houstonian would want the woodlands in the city limits anyway. We would then have to listen to them, and worse, give them a vote. I for one, would oppose any efforts to annex them. We already have Kingwood and Clear Lake. We don't need any more suburbanites in the city limits.

[nmainguy]

The city's official policy is that it has no annexation plans in the near future.  I don't think the city is interested in the Woodlands.  Too many bonds to pay off, plus it is too far away.  The only part the city would be interested in is the mall anyway.  They don't want the residences.

I don't know why any self respecting Houstonian would want the woodlands in the city limits anyway.  We would then have to listen to them, and worse, give them a vote.  I for one, would oppose any efforts to annex them.  We already have Kingwood and Clear Lake.  We don't need any more suburbanites in the city limits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I recall correctly [and someone correct me if I'm wrong] George Mitchell set in a provision that the Woodlands could not incorporate and could only be annexed by the COH. I agree with Red, however. We don't need another large group of whining suburbanites like those in Kingwood and Clear Lake who clearly hate the COH but have come to love the advantages of being citizens of the COH. Perhaps there could be a way to allow the Woodlands to incorporate, thus sparing Houston one more cultural wasteland of a suburb in our midsts.

[DJ V Lawrence]

No! No! No!      Houston does not need to annex any more land. Houston is already like one giant blob. Why is Houston the only major city that seems like it can't put an end to endless sprawl within the city limits and allow the suburbs to grow out more and gain an identitity for themselves, separate from Houston. The Woodlands should remain The Woodlands and Houston remain Houston. The larger the city is, the more difficult it will be to manage anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With all due respect, Houston, Sugarland, Katy, AND Woodlands are ALL looking to expand their cities. Not sure why, but I'm guessing for tax revenue. My prediction is that Houston would try to annex Woodlands within the next seven years. Pop. 60,000? Upper-middle class residence? Fast-growing community with property value rising? I can see Houston taking a shot at Woodlands first, and trying to make a deal with Montgomery county in the process. Not saying it's right, but from a big-city government aspect, it'd make sense.

[RedScare]

With all due respect, Houston, Sugarland, Katy, AND Woodlands are ALL looking to expand their cities. Not sure why, but I'm guessing for tax revenue. My prediction is that Houston would try to annex Woodlands within the next seven years. Pop. 60,000? Upper-middle class residence? Fast-growing community with property value rising? I can see Houston taking a shot at Woodlands first, and trying to make a deal with Montgomery county in the process. Not saying it's right, but from a big-city government aspect, it'd make sense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not to pick DJ, but The Woodlands is more trouble than it is worth. 60,000 residents need services provided by the city. All of those water and sewer lines were financed by bonds, which the city would have to pay off. Home values are relatively stagnant, due to the new construction in the area.

Finally, what deal would Houston have to make with Montgomery County? There are no deals to be made, as Houston doesn't need the county's permission to annex. Other than the tax producing mall, I still don't see Houston's need or desire for the Woodlands. As for population, FM 1960 is more dense than the Woodlands and has 5 times or more the popoulation. The subdivisions are closer to paying off their bonds, too. Much more attractive to a city looking for revenue.

[kjb434]

^^

As with your earlier statement too about the mall, I see Houston performing a specially annexation with the town center area (no residences) of the Woodlands. This way the city and operating MUD's with commercial could get sales tax revenue.

Your are right the city doesn't want to annex any residential. The city is growning on the inside anyway with a population increase. The special limited annexation is a win-win since the city doesn't have to provide services but gets a share in the sales tax revenue. The MUD which couldn't receive sales tax before now can get a share of it handed to them by the city.