Opinion ID: 1817476
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: The City's need for developable land

Text: ¶ 22. The Objectors point out that the City of Pearl has approximately 5.7 square miles of vacant, developable land left after its 1999 annexation, suitable for residential development. Additionally, the Objectors point to Mayor Jimmy Foster's testimony that the Riverwind subdivision on Pearson Road, south of I-20, can accommodate substantial residential development. The Objectors argue that the availability of land for residential development is particularly important in this case because Mayor Foster testified that the PAA would remain residential if the annexation is approved. ¶ 23. The City recognizes it has substantial land available for residential development. It points out, however, that most of it lies south of I-20 in the area it annexed in 1999 and south of a portion of the area it annexed in 1978. However, the special chancellor found little developable land to the north in the direction of the PAA. ¶ 24. Our previous annexation decisions clearly distinguish the impact upon reasonableness of available developable land in a city's path of growth as opposed to developable land in other areas. We have stated that the fact that there may be some other vacant lands already available in the City does not prohibit annexation nor does it require that an indicia be fount to be against the community proposing annexation. Id. at 973. Similarly, in In re Extension of Boundaries of City of Hattiesburg, 840 So.2d 69 (Miss.2003), the chancellor found the City of Hattiesburg had large sections of undeveloped land in South Hattiesburg. Nevertheless, this Court refused to reverse the chancellor's finding that Hattiesburg's need to expand was reasonable, based upon a need for developable land to the west, in the direction of the proposed annexation area. Id. at 84-85. ¶ 25. In arguing that Pearl has no need for expansion which would support its annexation effort, the Objectors focus on Pearl's slowly growing residential population, which increased approximately 12% from 1990 to 2000. However, the record reflects that the density of population in the City of Pearl is more than double every other municipality in Rankin County, except Brandon. Its density is four times that of neighboring Flowood. ¶ 26. At trial, Shelly Johnstone testified on behalf of the Objectors as an expert in the field of regional and municipal planning. Even her testimony suggests the special chancellor's finding of Pearl's need for expansion was reasonable and supported by the evidence. For example, she testified that at a level of about two-thirds build-out, [13] communities need to be considering adding territory to their community. She further stated that Pearl's build-out was 74 percent, leaving just 26 percent of the current city available for development. Other testimony established that the PAA was only 57.2 percent developed. ¶ 27. Based upon the record, we cannot say it was manifest error for the special chancellor to find that Pearl has a need for expansion which supports Pearl's annexation of the PAA.