Title
Discuss Possible Changes to the "REC" - Regional Employment Center Overlay District, Including Possible Amendments to Multiple Sections of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Plan, Future Land Use Plan Module Diagram, and Multi-Family Policy)
Summary
COUNCIL GOAL: Direction for Strategic Growth
MEETING DATE: March 16, 2015
DEPARTMENT: Planning
CONTACT: Brandon Opiela, Planning Manager
Michael Quint, Director of Planning
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION:
· Discuss possible changes to the "REC" - Regional Employment Center Overlay District, including possible amendments to multiple sections of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Plan, Future Land Use Plan Module Diagram, and Multi-Family Policy)
ITEM SUMMARY:
· At the February 2, 2015 work session, City Council discussed development issues (listed in the Background Section below) pertaining to the "REC" - Regional Employment Center Overlay District and directed Staff to meet with stakeholders within the Overlay as well as representatives of the development community to discuss a new approach for the REC area of McKinney.
· Staff met with the McKinney Economic Development Corporation's Development Advocacy Group on February 18, 2015 and also held a public input meeting on February 26, 2015 to discuss the development issues identified within the REC Overlay. Those in attendance at both meetings agreed that that the scope and vision for urban-style development within the REC Overlay was too large and that the associated regulations were inconsistent with current market realities. Attendees offered broad support for a new approach in the REC that could preserve current property entitlements while mitigating the challenges developments face within the REC Overlay (see attached comment cards).
· Staff has evaluated various possible solutions aimed at addressing the stated development issues, including but not limited to; removing the applicability of the REC Overlay for all new rezoning requests going forward, while keeping the REC Overlay regulations "on the books" for all existing properties; removing the applicability of the REC Overlay regulations from all properties; amending the REC Overlay regulations so that all requirements are made optional; comprehensively revising and re-visioning the REC Overlay; or leaving the REC Overlay regulations as they exist today.
· Staff is of the opinion that the best approach for addressing the development issues within the REC, while respecting existing properties rights, is to remove the applicability of the REC Overlay for all new rezoning requests going forward, while keeping the REC Overlay regulations "on the books" for all existing properties governed by the REC Overlay. Within this solution, all properties that are currently governed by the REC Overlay regulations can continue to develop according to the REC requirements, or choose to rezone to a standard zoning designation or to a Planned Development District.
· In conjunction with this approach, it is important that the governing policy documents for the REC (i.e. Future Land Use Plan (FLUP), Future Land Use Plan Module Diagram (FLUP MD), and Multi-Family Policy) also be amended to maintain consistency between City policies and ordinances. These amendments will help guide Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council when considering future rezoning requests.
· Staff welcomes any feedback the City Council may have concerning the recommended approach, which is discussed in more detail below:
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE:
· The following amendments are aimed at keeping the REC Overlay regulations "on the books" for all existing properties governed by the REC Overlay, while removing it's applicability for future rezoning requests.
· Proposed Changes to Section 146-99 (REC regional employment center overlay district (suffix)): As proposed, two sentences would be added to the district regulations stating that the REC Overlay may not be utilized for future rezoning requests. These sentences state: "The REC Overlay District shall no longer be applicable to properties zoned on or after June 1, 2015. Additionally, zoning or rezoning to this classification will not be permitted after June 1, 2015." Please note that these sentences would prohibit the district's use for rezoning requests going forward but would retain the existing regulations so that existing property rights remain untouched. Staff would also remove regulations in this section pertaining to future rezoning requests within the REC and remove the requirements for a general development plan which is no longer required due to the ordinance amendments in Appendix B (Urban Design Standards for the Regional Employment Center) approved in May of 2014. (see attached changes)
· Proposed Changes to Section 146-132 (Fences, walls, and screening requirements): As proposed by Staff, this modification would specify that existing properties subject to the regulations of the REC would remain exempt from the 6-foot tall masonry screening wall required along all side and rear property lines for multi-family developments. However, properties rezoned within the current limits of the Overlay after June 1, 2015 would no longer be exempt going forward. (see attached changes)
· Proposed Changes to Section 146-139 (Architectural and site standards): As proposed by Staff, this modification specifies that existing properties subject to the regulations of the REC would remain exempt from both the two-story limitation for multi-family developments and the requirement prohibiting exterior facing windows on a multi-family building from being oriented towards adjacent single family residential within 150 feet of an adjacent single family residential use or zone. However, properties rezoned within the current limits of the Overlay after June 1, 2015 will no longer be exempt from this requirement going forward. Please note the proposed changes attached are a markup of the proposed architectural standards to be considered for adoption by the City Council on March 17, 2015.
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
· The following amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are suggested to modify the land use section, including the FLUP and FLUP MD, establishing a new overall vision for the REC which is more consistent with current market realities and reduces the scope of the urban development pattern previously envisioned for the area.
· The FLUP exhibit in the Comprehensive Plan should be modified for the REC area (see attached). The proposed modifications are primarily based on existing zoning and land uses, but also includes a handful of modifications to specific parcels that are currently zoned agricultural or should be adjusted based on best planning practices and current/future market realities.
· Staff also suggests modifying the FLUP MD in order to remove the REC and Transit Village Modules currently shown for the properties within the REC Overlay (see attached). Staff proposes to establish two new modules in this area to better address the existing patterns of development and the predominant land uses within the area. Staff has defined these new modules as the Urban Mix Module and the Tollway Commercial Module:
o Urban Mix Module: The predominant use is single-family detached housing in both urban and traditional style patterns. This module also allows for medium density and high density urban residential with neighborhood office and retail facilities supporting the residential component. Community facilities such as schools, parks and churches are also included.
o Tollway Commercial Module: The principal uses include commercial, office, and entertainment uses with a strong regional draw, as well as vertical mixed-use projects that can be integrated into surrounding commercial uses. A mix of other residential housing types are permitted in small percentages and include, single-family, medium density, and high density urban residential uses. Community facilities such as churches, schools and parks are distributed throughout the module.
· As well, two new future land use mix category use definitions (for the FLUP MD) have been proposed to capture some of the nuanced development patterns currently seen within the REC area. These new land use definitions are:
o Tollway Commercial: Tollway Commercial provides for a significant concentration of commercial, retail and service uses serving the region as well as campus style office and corporate headquarter uses that provide substantial employment opportunities to the surrounding area. Commercial and office uses are attractive for tenants with larger space needs and convenient access to regional highways.
o High Density Urban Residential: This residential type is characterized by multi-family or apartment buildings in an urban and pedestrian oriented style of development (structures situated in close proximity to the street and parking internal to the site with limited visibility from adjacent streets), with densities higher than 24 dwelling units per acre. Vertical mixed-use and structured parking is encouraged within this residential type, incorporating ground floor commercial uses with residential uses above.
· Please note that the proposed FLUP and FLUP MD modifications are only preliminary, and have not been fully vetted by the development community, requiring additional feedback from stakeholders within the REC.
AMENDMENTS TO THE MULTI-FAMILY POLICY:
· In 2001, the City's Multi-Family Policy was approved, amending the 1990 Comprehensive Plan and providing the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission the information necessary to make informed decisions about future multi-family rezoning requests. As part of the multi-family policy, the City was divided into six (6) sectors in order to evaluate the percentage of multi-family units in the City.
· Per the policy, rezoning requests within sectors containing a total number of multi-family residential units exceeding 10% of the total number of existing or estimated future residential housing units should be recommended for denial. The policy currently exempts Sector 6 (REC Overlay) from this requirement, as the original urban and pedestrian-oriented vision of the REC encouraged higher densities than other areas of the City. If the vision for the REC overlay is no longer based on an urban vision, Staff recommends that the exemption of the REC area (Sector 6) from the Multi-Family Policy be removed and non-substantive clean-up items be addressed. (see attached changes)
NEXT STEPS:
o Staff will incorporate any feedback received from the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission regarding possible amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
o Staff will meet with stakeholders within the REC to solicit feedback regarding the possible amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
o Staff will draft proposed ordinance amendments and post the draft documents on our website to solicit additional feedback from the public and development community at large.
o Staff will bring a final draft of the proposed regulations to the City Council for further discussion and feedback.
o Staff will incorporate City Council feedback and begin formal approval of the proposed changes through the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
· The "REC" - Regional Employment Center Overlay District was adopted in 2001 and based on "new-urbanist" principles. Specifically, approximately 4,500 acres in the southwest portion of the City were identified for urban, pedestrian-oriented, dense development patterns. These standards were designed to help create a unique sense of place within the City, defined by developments with an urban feel and character.
· The REC Overlay District was significantly amended in 2003, which closely resembles the ordinance in place today.
· Since the adoption of the REC Overlay, the market has responded that this development type is not reasonable for tracts of this scope. Because of this fact, and because of changes in development trends, numerous rezoning requests have been made modifying these requirements to allow for more traditional suburban development patterns.
· In May of 2014, in effort to respond to regulations considered contrary to the current market and development trends, City Council approved amendments to the REC Overlay District making specific urban design concepts optional throughout the REC. These amendments addressed multiple ordinance requirements that had been included in numerous rezoning requests over the years in order to be more reflective of the development climate without modifying existing property rights. Although these amendments offer a greater level of flexibility and options for development, a number of issues still remain.
· At the November 3, 2014 work session, City Council directed Staff to initiate a re-evaluation of the "REC" - Regional Employment Center Overlay District and provide further information regarding possible changes or amendments to be made to the REC.
· The following list of development issues (expressed and reiterated over the past few years by citizens, the development community, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council and City Staff) were presented to the City Council at the February 2, 2015 work session and were subsequently presented to and discussed with the McKinney Economic Development Corporation's Development Advocacy Group on February 18, 2015 and stakeholders within the REC on February 26, 2015.
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
1) The REC Overlay regulations are confusing, conflict with other regulations, and necessitate frequent Staff interpretations.
2) The inability to ensure consistent quality and character within residential and non-residential developments.
3) Urban-style development should be in smaller acreages or nodes and is not feasible to develop across 4,500 acres of land.
4) Requirements for commercial developments within the REC are not always compatible with adjacent residential uses.
5) The predominance of suburban-style residential throughout the REC limits the opportunity for taller, dense developments to be constructed.
6) Vertical mixed-use projects are not sustainable when too much non-residential square footage is required.
7) There is too much multi-family residential allowed within the REC.
8) Rezoning requests to develop in a more suburban manner require a Planned Development District Ordinance to remove the requirements of the REC.
· Staff has also provided an aerial exhibit of the properties included within the REC. Staff has shaded each of the parcels to illustrate developed (using a lighter color) and undeveloped (using a bolder color) properties as well as to clarify which properties are currently subject to the requirements of the REC. Properties shaded in blue indicate those that have been zoned after February 6, 2001 (the establishment of the REC) and are currently subject to the guidelines of the REC. Properties shaded in red indicate those that were zoned prior to the establishment of the REC and are not currently subject to the design guidelines. Properties shaded in green indicate those that have rezoned to remove the applicability of the REC requirements.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
· N/A
BOARD OR COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
· The Planning and Zoning Commission has expressed broad concerns over the past years regarding the requirements of the REC Overlay District and the development challenges within the Overlay; however, this item has not been presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission previously.