Title
Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Petition to Annex (Case No. 26-0008A) and a Request to Zone (Case No. 26-0023Z) the Subject Property to “PD” - Planned Development, Generally to allow for Residential Uses and Modify Development Standards, Located on the West Side of County Road 161 and Approximately 1,350 feet North of County Road 124, and Accompanying Ordinance(s)
Summary
COUNCIL GOAL: Direction for Strategic and Economic Growth
(1.1: Provide a strong city economy by creating a Global Housing Strategy and facilitating a balance between industrial, commercial, residential, and open space)
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2026
DEPARTMENT: Development Services - Planning Department
CONTACT: Lucas Raley, AICP, CNU-A, CFM, Director of Planning
Caitlyn Strickland, AICP, Planning Manager
Araceli Botello, CNU-A, Planner II
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed zoning request and approval of the annexation as requested by the applicant, which includes the proposed annexation ordinance, proposed annexation facilities agreement, and proposed zoning ordinance.
Staff would be supportive of both the annexation and zoning request if the applicant were proposing our “R3” - Residential District, as that would align with the Comprehensive Plan.
However, if the applicant’s request is approved, the following special ordinance provisions shall apply:
1. The subject property shall be zoned “PD” - Planned Development District and subject to the following special ordinance provision:
a. The subject property shall develop in accordance with the attached development regulations.
ITEM SUMMARY: The applicant has submitted a petition to annex and a request to zone the approximate 25-acre subject property to “PD” - Planned Development District, which would generally allow for residential uses and to modify development standards. This project is located on the west side of County Road 161 and approximately 1,350 feet north of County Road 124.
Staff is unable to support the applicant’s request to zone the property as the applicant has only proposed reductions to our development standards and does not meet the intent of a “PD” - Planned Development District as outlined in our Unified Development Code. The applicant is proposing reductions to the City’s dimensional, landscaping, and screening standards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE: March 3, 2026 (Original Application)
April 29, 2026 (Revised Submittal)
June 4, 2026 (Revised Submittal)
Petition to Annex (Agenda Item #26-0008A)
• Pursuant to Chapter 43 (Sub-Chapter C-3) of the Texas Local Government Code, the applicant has submitted a petition for voluntary annexation into the City of McKinney for approximately 25 acres of land.
• The subject property is located in the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) of the City of McKinney. The purpose of the ETJ is to promote the general health, safety and welfare of a person residing in and adjacent to the municipalities. The Subdivision Ordinance applies to property within the ETJ; the Zoning Ordinance does not
• The subject property is located within the Prosper Independent School District.
• In association with tonight’s annexation request, the property owner is also proposing an Annexation Facilities Agreement outlining the development and infrastructure requirements of the property, including the provision of any applicable proportionality, impact, pro rata or parkland fees.
• The proposed Annexation Facilities Agreement provides for the standard development, infrastructure, and fee requirements of the city. In accordance with this, the applicant will provide the full and complete perimeter roadways for the subject property.
• As required by State Law, the applicant has also executed an agreement outlining the provision of municipal services associated with the proposed annexation (known as the Service Plan). This agreement for services will be included as an exhibit to the Annexation Ordinance.
• Staff recommend denial of the proposed Annexation Facilities Agreement and the proposed Annexation Ordinance, which includes the Service Plan for the provision of municipal services (Agenda Item #26-0008A).
Request to Zone (Agenda Item #26-0023Z)
• The applicant is requesting to zone the subject property to “PD” Planned Development zoning district to allow single-family residential development based on the R-5 and R-3 Residential zoning districts. While the zoning request aligns with the districts designated in the Comprehensive Plan, Planned Development (PD) districts are intended to provide innovative development and meaningful public benefits that cannot typically be achieved through conventional zoning. As proposed, the request does not demonstrate these benefits or unique site considerations, and the development could be accommodated through conventional zoning with minor modifications. Therefore, staff does not support the requested PD zoning (Agenda Item 26-0023Z).
• The applicant is requesting to reduce the required front setback in the R-3 Residential District from 15 feet to 5 feet. This reduction would significantly limit space for landscaping, required tree plantings, and other streetscape elements that support the neighborhood's residential character. The 15-foot front setback is already the minimum required in conventional residential zoning districts, including the R-3 and TR-1.8 Townhome Residential Districts, where townhome and brownstone-style developments can be successfully accommodated. Maintaining this setback provides an appropriate transition between the public street and private residences while preserving landscaping, functionality, and the overall quality of the development. For these reasons, staff does not support the requested reduction.
• The applicant proposes an alternative screening device along the frontage adjacent to the thoroughfare and the elimination of screening requirements along the rear and side property lines. While the applicant cites existing wooded areas and floodplain conditions as adequate buffering along the rear and sides of the property, the Code already provides flexibility to modify or waive screening requirements where natural features are sufficient. Removing the requirement would eliminate this flexibility and could expose future residents to adverse impacts as adjacent commercial and multifamily development occurs. Retaining the screening standards ensures consistency, while appropriate buffering can be required as surrounding land uses evolve over time.
• Due to the self-imposed reduction from 15 feet to 5 feet, the applicant proposes replacing required canopy trees with ornamental trees and relocating many canopy trees from front yards to common areas such as buffers, detention areas, and open space. While the overall number of trees would still be provided, staff has concerns with the proposal as it may not fully achieve the intent of canopy trees in front yards to provide shade, enhance walkability, and contribute to neighborhood character
• In accordance with State Law, the proposed zoning request was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the June 23, 2026, meeting and received a favorable recommendation by the Commission in a 7-0-0 vote.
• Information regarding the zoning request and Staff’s full evaluation is attached to this agenda item as “26-0023Z - Zoning Request Information.”
EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES:
|
Location |
Zoning District (Permitted Land Uses) |
Existing Land Use |
|
Subject Property |
City of McKinney Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) |
Undeveloped Land and Agricultural uses |
|
North |
“MF36” Multi-family Residential (Multi-family use) |
Single-Family Residential |
|
South |
City of McKinney Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) |
Single-Family Residential and Multi-family use |
|
East |
“PD” Planned Development - PD Ordinance 2025-06-051(Office, Commercial, and Single-Family uses) and City of McKinney Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) |
Institutional, Undeveloped Land, and Single-Family Residential use |
|
West |
“PD” Planned Development - PD Ordinance 2013-12-112 and 2013-12-113(Commercial and Open Space/Flood Plain uses) |
Undeveloped Land and Agricultural uses |
OPPOSITION TO OR SUPPORT OF REQUEST: Staff has received no letters of support to this request and no letters of opposition. This does not include emails or letters that may have been sent directly to members of the Council. As part of the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearings, Staff has not received any citizen comments through the online citizen portal.
ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION:
1. Annexation and City Services.
• The annexation of land is governed by Chapter 43, Sub-Chapter C-3 of the Texas Local Government Code. This code section outlines the steps and procedures that must be followed in order to incorporate land that is within a municipality’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) into its corporate city limits on request of the owner(s). The proposed annexation is following these statutory obligations.
• The McKinney Fire Department currently provides fire and medical emergency services in this area. Currently, police response is from Collin County. The Texas Local Government Code stipulates that police and fire services must be provided pursuant to the terms outlined in the written agreement for the provision of municipal services (known as the Service Plan).
• The Texas Local Government Code stipulates that solid waste collection must be available pursuant to the terms outlined in the written agreement for the provision of municipal services (known as the Service Plan).
2. Development Requirements.
• All necessary public improvements will be required at time of platting, unless otherwise specified in an approved facilities, development, or annexation agreement.
• Upon annexation into the city, development of the subject property will be subject to the payment of a proportionality fee and/or impact fee, which represents a roughly proportional amount necessary to offset the roadway infrastructure capacity needs of the subject property.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
• Annexation of additional property has financial implications for the City. However, based on the size and location of the property being annexed, it is not expected to have a significant financial impact to the city.
• Although the developer will be responsible for upgrading roads and extending utilities as development occurs, the long-term maintenance of these facilities will be the City’s responsibility.
• The ISO rating determines insurance rates in McKinney. Poor availability of water resources in proposed annexed areas could have a negative impact on ISO ratings.
o An ISO rating is based on a 105 point system:
o 40 points for water system (supply, distribution, fire flow, hydrants, maintenance, etc.)
o 50 points for evaluation of the Fire Department itself
o 10 points for alarm systems
o 5 points for code enforcement, plan review, etc.
• The effects of additional annexation on ISO ratings are cumulative. The City’s current ISO rating is 1 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best and 10 being the worst. The latest evaluation was conducted in 2018. An ISO rating of 1 is required to be evaluated every 4 years.
• Annexed parcels are subject to City property tax. This tract may currently have an agricultural valuation classification with Collin Appraisal District (CAD). An AG exemption is given to properties in active agricultural uses, which allows the property to have a lower appraisal value and thus, lower taxes. When property with an AG exemption is developed, it is subject to rollback taxes for each of the previous five years. As such, the owner would be required to pay County, ISD, and City taxes which had been exempted during that five-year period. Whenever this proposed tract is developed, the City would receive rollback taxes if the property has such an exemption.
BOARD OR COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Annexation requests are considered solely by the City Council. However, the associated zoning request was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the June 23, 2025, meeting and received a favorable recommendation by the Commission in a 7-0-0 vote.
To view the actions and discussions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission related to this item, please find the meeting recording at the following web address:
<https://mckinneytx.new.swagit.com/videos/395841>