The Tomball City Council voted unanimously to schedule public hearings on a proposed annexation of the Greyloo Grove property and a related public improvement district (PID), moving the annexation first read to the July 21 meeting and the PID hearing to Aug. 4.

City staff said the Greyloo Grove site, owned by FLS Development, is contiguous to Tomball and totals just over 50 acres; the developer proposes about 88 single‑family homes and a 45,000‑square‑foot commercial footprint. "The property proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the city," Thomas, a city staff member, told the council during the presentation of the annexation application.

The petition for PID creation would cover 43.149 acres of the site and requests a reimbursement bond issue of up to $8,000,000, with the developer proposing an assessment rate of $0.95 per $100 of assessed value. Megan, a city staff member presenting the PID materials, said those assessment and payment figures are preliminary and that bond counsel provided conservative estimates for maximum annual installments.

Why it matters: Annexation and PID creation can change who provides water and sewer service, how infrastructure is financed, and how future property taxes and assessments are levied. Council members flagged amenities, road widths and long‑term maintenance responsibility as local concerns that could affect residents and the city budget.

Details and next steps

City staff said the project includes a municipal service plan outlining police and fire protection and solid waste collection if annexation proceeds. Staff told council that the developer and ACWA Services must complete a CCN (certificate of convenience and necessity) transfer for water and wastewater before annexation can be finalized; legal advice will require that CCN transfer be complete prior to annexation.

Thomas said the developer projects an estimated market value roughly $625,000 per residential unit (staff noted some units could be higher) and an estimated $16,000,000 in commercial value. The PID acreage differs from the annexation acreage; staff said the PID would not include one small tract that is not contiguous to existing city limits.

Council discussion centered on amenities and street design. One council member asked whether the roadway would be built to the same width as connecting sections and expressed concern that future widening might become a city expense. Another council member noted the development includes larger lots and that homeowners may add private amenities such as pools, reducing the need for a community pool.

Council then approved motions — without recorded roll‑call names — to set a public hearing and the first reading of the annexation ordinance for July 21 and to call a public hearing for PID creation on Aug. 4. Staff said a memorandum of understanding (MOU) negotiated with the developer will be brought forward to council at a later meeting to lay out more detailed commitments.

What remains unsettled

Staff emphasized several items remain to be finalized before any annexation is effective: the CCN transfer from ACWA Services, approval of the planned development by the Planning & Zoning Commission, final PID documents and any MOU terms. Bond amounts, assessment amounts per lot and exact annual assessments will be finalized as part of the PID assessment process and bond sizing, staff said.

Council actions

The council’s votes were recorded as passing unanimously on both the motion to set the annexation hearing and the motion to call the PID hearing; staff indicated subsequent council meetings will consider first and second readings and any MOU.