Agenda No. 2.
CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
| City Council Meeting: | October 22, 2024 |
| Department: | Planning & Community Development |
| Subject: | Ordinance 24-S-156 - Approving amendments to Part III of the Schertz Code of Ordinances, Unified Development Code (UDC), to Article 5 - Zoning Districts and Article 10 - Parking Standards Final Reading (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas) |
BACKGROUND
As stated in the Unified Development Code (UDC), City Council from time to time, on its own motion, or at the recommendation of City Staff amend, change, or modify text in any portion of the UDC to establish and maintain stable and desirable development. It is generally considered good practice to periodically review and update the development regulations due to changing conditions, community goals, and/or State and Federal regulations.
A recent regional trend in the housing market is for developments that offer something in-between traditional single-family subdivision housing and large multi-family complexes. Staff has recently received several proposals for these developments, typically in the form of one large lot that behaves like a multi-family complex that is spread out; a product known in the industry as Build to Rent (BTR). City Council has recently approved two such proposals as components of a larger Planned Development District (PDD) project. The two proposals that were approved were the Schertz Station PDD and the Schertz Gateway PDD.
When an applicant is applying for a Planned Development District (PDD), they must select a base zoning district. The PDD allows applicants to request modifications to the Unified Development Code (UDC) to fit their project. Given that our zoning districts offer mostly single-family zoning variations and limited other options, both Schertz Station and Schertz Gateway selected the Apartment/Multi-Family Residential District (R-4) and lowered the maximum density from 24 dwelling units per acre to around 10-12 dwelling units per acre.
However, when an applicant applies for a straight zone change, they must adhere to the requirements as set forth in the UDC. This has the potential to present a problem with this middle-density housing product. When City Council approves PDD applications, they also approve the concept that is tied to the application. This ensures no deviation from what was presented. With a straight zone change, there is no such requirement to adhere to the concept. So, an applicant may propose a middle density housing product as part of a zone change request for an R-4 district, but if said proposal were approved, there would be nothing preventing them from building 24 units per acre. This means that an applicant wishing to bring a 10-12 unit per acre housing product will almost always have to go the PDD route.
Given that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have been amenable to these middle density housing project proposals, staff concluded that the city should establish a new base zoning district in order to codify a framework for what these projects should look like in Schertz. The proposed amendments in Ord. 24-S-156 will establish a new zoning district called Middle Density Residential District (R-5). As part of this proposal, Staff has drafted language to provide incentives for "smaller" developments. Smaller is being defined as R-5 developments occurring on tracts under 1 acre. This includes a small density bonus, as well as decreased site design and parking requirements.
In addition to establishing a new residential zoning district, Staff is also proposing to make modifications to the current Apartment / Multi-Family District (R-4). With the proposed establishing of R-5, Schertz will be creating space for incremental multi-family developments through differences in density and scale of housing products. This means that the current R-4 district can be repurposed to be slightly denser and taller. However, staff is proposing that when deciding on the appropriateness of location for these developments, the UDC requirements become more selective.
The proposed amendments will be in the following sections of the UDC:
To summarize the above table, Middle Density District (R-5) is completely new and is designed to be a lower density multi-family district. The text you see above is proposed to be added to the UDC. For Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4), Staff is proposing to modify the narrative text in UDC 21.5.5 to include higher density. However, the proposed amendments to R-4 prevent applicants from getting access through single-family neighborhoods, and they require that R-4 districts be adjacent to arterial streets. Additionally, staff is revising the table in UDC 21.5.7 to allow for higher buildings, from the current 35 feet requirement to 50 feet. This is proposed with the intent to allow for one additional story and while giving developers additional room for architectural creativity. Finally, Staff is proposing to increase the minimum lot size to 1 acre and the minimum lot width to 400 feet.
A recent regional trend in the housing market is for developments that offer something in-between traditional single-family subdivision housing and large multi-family complexes. Staff has recently received several proposals for these developments, typically in the form of one large lot that behaves like a multi-family complex that is spread out; a product known in the industry as Build to Rent (BTR). City Council has recently approved two such proposals as components of a larger Planned Development District (PDD) project. The two proposals that were approved were the Schertz Station PDD and the Schertz Gateway PDD.
When an applicant is applying for a Planned Development District (PDD), they must select a base zoning district. The PDD allows applicants to request modifications to the Unified Development Code (UDC) to fit their project. Given that our zoning districts offer mostly single-family zoning variations and limited other options, both Schertz Station and Schertz Gateway selected the Apartment/Multi-Family Residential District (R-4) and lowered the maximum density from 24 dwelling units per acre to around 10-12 dwelling units per acre.
However, when an applicant applies for a straight zone change, they must adhere to the requirements as set forth in the UDC. This has the potential to present a problem with this middle-density housing product. When City Council approves PDD applications, they also approve the concept that is tied to the application. This ensures no deviation from what was presented. With a straight zone change, there is no such requirement to adhere to the concept. So, an applicant may propose a middle density housing product as part of a zone change request for an R-4 district, but if said proposal were approved, there would be nothing preventing them from building 24 units per acre. This means that an applicant wishing to bring a 10-12 unit per acre housing product will almost always have to go the PDD route.
Given that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have been amenable to these middle density housing project proposals, staff concluded that the city should establish a new base zoning district in order to codify a framework for what these projects should look like in Schertz. The proposed amendments in Ord. 24-S-156 will establish a new zoning district called Middle Density Residential District (R-5). As part of this proposal, Staff has drafted language to provide incentives for "smaller" developments. Smaller is being defined as R-5 developments occurring on tracts under 1 acre. This includes a small density bonus, as well as decreased site design and parking requirements.
In addition to establishing a new residential zoning district, Staff is also proposing to make modifications to the current Apartment / Multi-Family District (R-4). With the proposed establishing of R-5, Schertz will be creating space for incremental multi-family developments through differences in density and scale of housing products. This means that the current R-4 district can be repurposed to be slightly denser and taller. However, staff is proposing that when deciding on the appropriateness of location for these developments, the UDC requirements become more selective.
The proposed amendments will be in the following sections of the UDC:
| UDC Sections | ||||||||
| Section 21.5.2 Zoning Districts Established Table establishing zoning districts in the City |
||||||||
| Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) | Middle Density Residential (R-5) | |||||||
| (no change) | Adding Middle Density Residential (R-5) | |||||||
| Section 21.5.5 Zoning Districts Established A narrative description of each zoning district. |
||||||||
| Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) | Middle Density Residential (R-5) | |||||||
| Intended to provide denser apartment and multi-family style developments. This district is a suitable transition between single-family districts and commercial uses. However, Apartment/Multi-Family Residential Districts (R-4) shall not be located in areas where they would increase traffic with access through single-family neighborhoods and shall be located adjacent to arterial streets. The maximum density shall be thirty-five (35) units per acre. Twenty percent (20%) of the total platted area shall be provided as common, usable open space. |
Intended to provide developments that offer a variety of housing types. This district is a suitable transition between single-family residential and commercial and/or denser multi-family developments. Comprised of attached or detached residential dwelling units.
|
|||||||
| Section 21.5.7 Dimensional and Developmental Standards Section with setbacks, height requirements, min lot width, etc. |
||||||||
| Lot Size and Dimensions | Setbacks | Misc. Requirements | ||||||
| Zoning District | Area sq. ft. | Width sq. ft. | Depth ft. | Front ft. | Side ft. | Rear ft. | Max Height ft. | Imp. Coverage |
| Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) | 43,560 | 400 | 100 | 25 | 20 | 20 | 50 | 75% |
| Middle Density (R-5) | 10,890 | - | - | 25 | 10 | 10 | 35 | 80% |
| New Key for R-5: (q) Refer to section 21.5.7.B.8 21.5.7.B.8 : Middle Density District (R-5) developments may have unique designs and dimensions. Due to this, the following additional standards apply. These standards pertain to building separation space with the intent for fire safety:
- When HVAC units are not within the building separation space the minimum separation is ten (10) feet. - When HVAC units are within the building separation space, or either structure is above one story, the minimum separation is fifteen (15) feet. - HVAC units shall be on opposite sides of buildings. - These additional standards are not required if fire suppression systems are installed within the buildings. |
||||||||
| Section 21.5.7 Permitted Use Table Section with uses permitted within each zoning district |
||||||||
| Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) | Middle Density Residential (R-5) | |||||||
| (no change) | Accessory Building Church (with Specific Use Permit) Gated Community Multi-Family Apartment Dwelling Municipal Uses One-Family Dwelling Attached One-Family Dwelling Detached Park/Playground School |
|||||||
| Section 21.10.8 Off Street Loading and Unloading Requirements. Section that provides parking requirements |
||||||||
| Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) | Middle Density Residential (R-5) | |||||||
| (no change) | For tracts one (1) acre or less, 1.5 spaces per unit For tracts exceeding one (1) acre, 2 spaces per unit |
|||||||
To summarize the above table, Middle Density District (R-5) is completely new and is designed to be a lower density multi-family district. The text you see above is proposed to be added to the UDC. For Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4), Staff is proposing to modify the narrative text in UDC 21.5.5 to include higher density. However, the proposed amendments to R-4 prevent applicants from getting access through single-family neighborhoods, and they require that R-4 districts be adjacent to arterial streets. Additionally, staff is revising the table in UDC 21.5.7 to allow for higher buildings, from the current 35 feet requirement to 50 feet. This is proposed with the intent to allow for one additional story and while giving developers additional room for architectural creativity. Finally, Staff is proposing to increase the minimum lot size to 1 acre and the minimum lot width to 400 feet.
GOAL
To amend the UDC to review and update the development regulations due to changing conditions and community goals in order to establish and maintain sound, stable and desirable development.
COMMUNITY BENEFIT
It is the City’s desire to promote safe, orderly, efficient development and ensure compliance with the City’s vision of future growth.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
When evaluating UDC amendments, staff uses the Criteria of Approval found in 21.4.7.D.
1. The proposed amendment promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City
The UDC functions better when we provide adequate zoning district options for applicants. Currently, applicants either choose a single-family district or Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) district, and when they desire something in-between these, they go the route of a Planned Development District (PDD). Each property in the city has unique challenges pertaining to development. Some properties may be too small for a single-family subdivision to be economically viable. A higher density product on the same property, such as an apartment complex, may also be incompatible with surrounding land uses. This situation often occurs in Schertz and is limiting the housing products that can be provided to the city. Additionally, high density housing proposals, either in the form of Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) requests or PDD requests, have faced much scrutiny from citizens and decision-makers. In order to promote orderly and efficient development, Staff is proposing these changes to help balance the demand for housing while attempting to alleviate the friction between established neighborhoods and incoming developments.
2. An amendment to the text is consistent with other policies of this UDC and the City
With the recent approval of middle density housing proposals, such as Schertz Gateway PDD and Schertz Station PDD, these amendments are attempting to codify recently adopted policy in the UDC.
Additionally, Chapter 2 of the City of Schertz Strategic Plan explains the city's Policy Values with regard to "high quality of life". High quality of life is "a well planned community that creates convenient living". Part of planning the community well is responding to issues and developments that have created friction in the community. Also, planning a community well is adapting to trends in the housing market and ensuring Schertz has the flexibility to mindfully capture these trends. The Strategic Plan also states that a high quality life is not: "limited options for work, live and play". The purpose of these amendments is to help expand our zoning/density options to help the UDC be consistent with these policies.
3. Any proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of this UDC and the City
One UDC objective strives to "prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue concentration or diffusion of population". The UDC effectively steers applicants to choose the higher density options in Apartment/Multi-Family Residential (R-4), because there is a lack of middle density zoning options. The UDC also lays out the goal "to minimize the conflicts among the uses of land and buildings". Single-family subdivisions and adjacent high-density multifamily proposals have proven to be a source of conflict in the city. Providing a middle density zoning option and revising our existing Apartment / Multi-Family District (R-4) will help alleviate this conflict.
The City of Schertz Strategic Plan also has clear stated goals for the Operational Values of the city. Among these are the goals to be innovative and proactive. Innovative is "finding a better way to do things" and "being creative". Staff is making strides with these amendments to not be complacent with the status quo. "Proactive means initiating change by anticipating future situations in order to make things happen". Within this framework, it is the responsibility of staff to be "continuously improving and evolving", "forward thinking", and have "the ability to forecast and meet needs even before the customer identifies them". These amendments would achieve these goals in the Strategic Plan.
4. Other criteria which, at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the amendment.
On, August 6, 2024, Staff brought these proposed changes to the City Council for a workshop. Council received the proposal positively and directed Staff to move forward with the amendment process. Staff has receieved no special considerations.
For these reasons, staff is recommending approval of Ord. 24-S-146.
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on September 4, 2024, and made a recommendation of approval with a 5-1 vote. Commissioner Richard Braud was the "nay" vote on this motion to recommend approval. The Commissioner voiced concerns about having denser development patterns near established single family subdivisions.
City Council held a public hearing on October 15, 2024 and voted to approve the ordinance with a 6-0 vote provided that staff increase the parking minimum for the 1 ac or less tracts in R-5. Staff updated the ordinance, redline and clean version to reflec that chage - but staff did not update the attached presentation.
1. The proposed amendment promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City
The UDC functions better when we provide adequate zoning district options for applicants. Currently, applicants either choose a single-family district or Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) district, and when they desire something in-between these, they go the route of a Planned Development District (PDD). Each property in the city has unique challenges pertaining to development. Some properties may be too small for a single-family subdivision to be economically viable. A higher density product on the same property, such as an apartment complex, may also be incompatible with surrounding land uses. This situation often occurs in Schertz and is limiting the housing products that can be provided to the city. Additionally, high density housing proposals, either in the form of Apartment / Multi-Family (R-4) requests or PDD requests, have faced much scrutiny from citizens and decision-makers. In order to promote orderly and efficient development, Staff is proposing these changes to help balance the demand for housing while attempting to alleviate the friction between established neighborhoods and incoming developments.
2. An amendment to the text is consistent with other policies of this UDC and the City
With the recent approval of middle density housing proposals, such as Schertz Gateway PDD and Schertz Station PDD, these amendments are attempting to codify recently adopted policy in the UDC.
Additionally, Chapter 2 of the City of Schertz Strategic Plan explains the city's Policy Values with regard to "high quality of life". High quality of life is "a well planned community that creates convenient living". Part of planning the community well is responding to issues and developments that have created friction in the community. Also, planning a community well is adapting to trends in the housing market and ensuring Schertz has the flexibility to mindfully capture these trends. The Strategic Plan also states that a high quality life is not: "limited options for work, live and play". The purpose of these amendments is to help expand our zoning/density options to help the UDC be consistent with these policies.
3. Any proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of this UDC and the City
One UDC objective strives to "prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue concentration or diffusion of population". The UDC effectively steers applicants to choose the higher density options in Apartment/Multi-Family Residential (R-4), because there is a lack of middle density zoning options. The UDC also lays out the goal "to minimize the conflicts among the uses of land and buildings". Single-family subdivisions and adjacent high-density multifamily proposals have proven to be a source of conflict in the city. Providing a middle density zoning option and revising our existing Apartment / Multi-Family District (R-4) will help alleviate this conflict.
The City of Schertz Strategic Plan also has clear stated goals for the Operational Values of the city. Among these are the goals to be innovative and proactive. Innovative is "finding a better way to do things" and "being creative". Staff is making strides with these amendments to not be complacent with the status quo. "Proactive means initiating change by anticipating future situations in order to make things happen". Within this framework, it is the responsibility of staff to be "continuously improving and evolving", "forward thinking", and have "the ability to forecast and meet needs even before the customer identifies them". These amendments would achieve these goals in the Strategic Plan.
4. Other criteria which, at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the amendment.
On, August 6, 2024, Staff brought these proposed changes to the City Council for a workshop. Council received the proposal positively and directed Staff to move forward with the amendment process. Staff has receieved no special considerations.
For these reasons, staff is recommending approval of Ord. 24-S-146.
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on September 4, 2024, and made a recommendation of approval with a 5-1 vote. Commissioner Richard Braud was the "nay" vote on this motion to recommend approval. The Commissioner voiced concerns about having denser development patterns near established single family subdivisions.
City Council held a public hearing on October 15, 2024 and voted to approve the ordinance with a 6-0 vote provided that staff increase the parking minimum for the 1 ac or less tracts in R-5. Staff updated the ordinance, redline and clean version to reflec that chage - but staff did not update the attached presentation.
RECOMMENDATION
Approval of Ordinance 24-S-156