Is Annexation
good for the City of
Rockville?
Definition:
A legal process to incorporate into the City the territory
of another
jurisdiction.
Over the
past 50 years, Rockville has successfully annexed close by properties
to
achieve local Rockville community objectives. Generally, annexations
are good
for the City because they help our community’s future growth
since most of our available
land has been developed.
For example,
two recent annexations have led to the successful developments: the
King Farm
and Falls Grove communities. These two farms presented the opportunity
for the
City to create mix-use developments featuring housing, business, and
community
facilities. Additionally, these annexations allowed the City of
Rockville,
rather than the County, to plan the developments and control the
various
outcomes in keeping with the City’s community objectives and
Master Plan.
More
importantly, since Rockville sees itself as primarily a residential
community,
annexation of the two farms provided the opportunity to protect
adjacent
residential neighborhoods, such as Woodley, College Gardens, Glenora
Hills, and
Lakewood and allowed the better staging of development to control
traffic and
other impacts. The commercial and retail portions of these new
neighborhoods
provided needed local community services as well as important tax
revenues to
the City.
Usually, a
major advantage to the City of an annexation is the fact that the City
has a
lot of the needed infrastructure in place to handle some of the
requirements of
the new development. Or,
the annexation
allows for upgrades and expansion of existing resources. For example,
expansion
of the Blue Plains Sewage Plant and West Gude Drive were built in
anticipation
of the King and Thomas farms development. In addition, the
City’s progressive
Master Plan helps predict other long-range expansions of facilities to
accommodate future development including Town Center and Rockville Pike.
A key issue
with annexation for the City is to make sure an annexation makes sense.
First,
the City has to determine that the taxes and other revenues generated
by the
eventual development outweigh the increased costs of services.
Secondly, the
City has to determine that a particular annexation will give the City
greater
control over the zoning and land-use decisions rather than the current
controlling jurisdiction, likely Montgomery County. For example, the
City for
years tried to annex the now Park Potomac property but was rebuffed by
the
owners who wanted higher densities than the City felt appropriate; Park
Potomac
was developed under County guidance.
Thirdly,
if the City can control the use and
costs of needed infrastructure on an annexed property, this offers more
protection to City taxpayers, as well as, assures longer life spans for
the
infrastructure. Fourthly, as the results of King and Thomas farms show,
the
City acquired more land for parks, recreation, affordable housing, and
other
community benefits. Lastly, annexation does not injure or hinder
Montgomery
County but brings long term tax and services benefits to both
jurisdictions.
Jim Coyle,
December
2011