For several miles southward from the US 49/98 interchange, Hattiesburg's city limits continues to stretch down 49 to near Camp Shelby. It didn't annex any land west or east of 49; just 49 itself. Same with Tuscaloosa, as a narrow strip of the city's border stretches out eastward on I-20/59. Seems to me that this is done for ticket-writing purposes (read: money grab by the local PDs).
Check out the city of Huxley, Texas. It seems to be nothing but roads.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/apps-cg/grid_search/_includes/countymapbook/Pages/541.pdf (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/apps-cg/grid_search/_includes/countymapbook/Pages/541.pdf)
According to an online article, it was drawn that way in order to include only houses of customers who wanted to receive municipal gas service and get out of the high prices of the area's commercial gas service.
http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hlh60 (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hlh60)
Edit:
I don't know how many states use the concept of extraterritorial jurisdiction, but in Texas every size of city has some ETJ, and the biggest cities have five miles of it. In ETJ a city can enforce certain planning ordinances and can annex territory almost at will, and no other city can incorporate or annex territory within it. This incentivizes the annexation of strips along state highways, which require no municipal services (but bring the potential for traffic violation fine revenues), so that the ETJ is extended and ensures the potential to capture future tax revenues.
ETJ is bigger for bigger cities. There is a bill in the legislature that would set the ETJ for all cities at a half-mile.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_annexation_in_the_United_States#Shoestring_annexation
Oklahoma is particularly bad wrt enclosing areas by thin strips. See Muskogee (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=muskogee+ok) and Durant (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=durant+ok).
Quote from: NE2 on March 11, 2015, 01:34:28 AM
Oklahoma is particularly bad wrt enclosing areas by thin strips. See Muskogee (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=muskogee+ok) and Durant (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=durant+ok).
I agree, it seems to be epidemic in Oklahoma (although my impression, perhaps incorrect, is that the practice started in Texas). Tulsa and just about all of its suburbs have done the same thing. Check out the huge strip annexation that Claremore (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=claremore+ok) did to its east, and how Owasso (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=owasso+ok) is trying to box out Limestone to its east. In most cases, I don't think it's really about ticket revenues. Rather, I think it's primarily about city planning. They want to be in control of zoning in the area that surrounds their existing development, and to carve out some space into which they can grow as future development is desired. The concern is that, if you don't create space for your own city, another municipality will encroach, and then you're not in control.
Texas loves to annex the rivers...the riverbanks tend to all be part of Austin
Island Park, Idaho... that is all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_Park,_Idaho (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_Park,_Idaho)
Quote from: NE2 on March 11, 2015, 01:34:28 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_annexation_in_the_United_States#Shoestring_annexation
Oklahoma is particularly bad wrt enclosing areas by thin strips. See Muskogee (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=muskogee+ok) and Durant (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=durant+ok).
There are several entertaining city limits in the Birmingham, AL area including:
Birmingham, AL - mostly due to water supply and commercial development http://goo.gl/maps/14lmm (http://goo.gl/maps/14lmm)
Vestavia Hills, AL - discontinuous city limits only allowed by an amendment to the State Constitution http://goo.gl/maps/8gUpK (http://goo.gl/maps/8gUpK)
Quote from: golden eagle on March 11, 2015, 12:47:27 AM
For several miles southward from the US 49/98 interchange, Hattiesburg's city limits continues to stretch down 49 to near Camp Shelby. It didn't annex any land west or east of 49; just 49 itself. Same with Tuscaloosa, as a narrow strip of the city's border stretches out eastward on I-20/59. Seems to me that this is done for ticket-writing purposes (read: money grab by the local PDs).
The Tuscaloosa annexation was done to connect the Mercedes plant with Tuscaloosa city utilities.
Burnside, Ky. annexed a section of shoreline along Lake Cumberland so a restaurant at a marina could sell alcohol when the city went wet while the county was still dry.
Annexing along highways is pretty common.
Quote from: SD Mapman on March 11, 2015, 11:12:14 AM
Island Park, Idaho... that is all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_Park,_Idaho (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_Park,_Idaho)
I'm surprised that the city limits were never expanded to include all of US 20 along that stretch, after the main road moved off of what is now old US 191. Also fascinating: how the street grid near Henry's Fork is only partially included in the municipal boundary.
Strip annexation was once very common in Arizona, but was banned in 1980 as municipalities were doing so to prevent other municipalities from annexing the same area. This past strip annexation practice created lots of "county islands", unincorporated areas of counties completely surrounded by a municipality.
There are a few places in Maryland that have done "shoestring" annexations, but it is usually to reach a parcel that the owners want to be within the corporate limits of the municipality. Berlin, Worcester County, on the Eastern Shore comes to mind as a good example of this (map here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Berlin,+MD&ll=38.331423,-75.217638&spn=0.052045,0.09244&cid=11425097827863894956&hnear=Berlin,+Worcester+County,+Maryland&t=m&z=14))
IIRC, Coburg OR annexed some of I-5, and land on the other side of the highway from the town, to preserve a speed trap it was running on I-5.
Quote from: clong on March 11, 2015, 11:14:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 11, 2015, 01:34:28 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_annexation_in_the_United_States#Shoestring_annexation
Oklahoma is particularly bad wrt enclosing areas by thin strips. See Muskogee (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=muskogee+ok) and Durant (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=durant+ok).
There are several entertaining city limits in the Birmingham, AL area including:
Birmingham, AL - mostly due to water supply and commercial development http://goo.gl/maps/14lmm (http://goo.gl/maps/14lmm)
Vestavia Hills, AL - discontinuous city limits only allowed by an amendment to the State Constitution http://goo.gl/maps/8gUpK (http://goo.gl/maps/8gUpK)
Don't forget about Huntsville, AL (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Huntsville,+AL&hl=en&sll=33.520661,-86.80249&sspn=0.341749,0.441513&t=h&hnear=Huntsville,+Madison+County,+Alabama&z=10), which has almost completely boxed in Madison.
Related but distinct from this:
Los Angeles annexed the Harbor Gateway area many years ago (early 1900s) to gain contiguous land access to San Pedro/Wilmington. Three decades later, State Route 11 was established along Figueroa Street which runs through much of this narrow district.
As a result of this and the San Pedro annexation, the Harbor Freeway segment of 110 (the modern major highway supplanting Figueroa in this function) runs almost entirely within the City of Los Angeles, except for a short segment south of 405 in Carson. (For that matter, 110 as a whole only leaves LA in the aforementioned Carson section and for the final few miles in South Pasadena/Pasadena)
Northwest of Toronto, Dufferin County wanted to build a bypass of the town of Orangeville, which sits immediately north of the county line. Unfortunately for that plan, a good chunk of the available corridor falls south of the line, within Peel Region. So what has happened is while the bypass was constructed within the one region, it is actually owned, maintained, and signed by Dufferin.
The portion within Peel is a controlled access arterial, so there aren't any properties directly affected by this odd arrangement.
Shenanigans like strip annexation is something that we New Englanders know nothing about.
Same with unincorporated county land.
Not entirely true...there is some "unincorporated" county land in northern Maine. There are also 4 such parcels (the "Gores" and one "Grant") in Vermont. I believe all four Vermont examples are uninhabited, though there's a state highway (VT 17) that runs through one of them.
Quote from: froggie on March 17, 2015, 08:52:03 AM
Not entirely true...there is some "unincorporated" county land in northern Maine. There are also 4 such parcels (the "Gores" and one "Grant") in Vermont. I believe all four Vermont examples are uninhabited, though there's a state highway (VT 17) that runs through one of them.
A few in northern NH (around Mt Washington and north of Errol) as well. For southern New England though, 3 states with every inch of ground being a part of a town or city.
This reminds me of Hampton, FL which made the news for its speed traps last year. This sentence from its Wikipedia page says it all:
"In the mid 1990s, Hampton annexed a short stretch of U.S. Highway 301 west of the city in order to get revenue from traffic tickets issued to motorists driving on that highway".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton,_Florida (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton,_Florida)
Apparently the state has let them stay incorporated after deannexing the strip of highway and decommissioning their police force, among other reforms.
Milton, Kentucky does this on US 421