City of Rockville - File #: 25-1728

• File #: 25-1728
• Type: Discussion and Instructions
• Status: Agenda Ready
• File created: 5/19/2025
• In control: Planning Commission
• On agenda: 5/28/2025
• Title: Work Session No. 2 on the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite (ZOR) and Comprehensive Map Amendment (CMA)

Planning Commission Memo

MEETING DATE: May 28, 2025

REPORT DATE: May 21, 2025

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Holly Simmons and Jim Wasilak

SUBJECT:

title

Work Session No. 2 on the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite (ZOR) and Comprehensive Map Amendment (CMA)

end

BACKGROUND:

Background 

The city is undertaking a comprehensive rewrite of the city’s Zoning Ordinance to modernize this chapter of the City Code so that it better accommodates the changing living, working, and recreation trends of the 21st century. In conjunction with the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite (ZOR), the city’s zoning map will be updated through a Comprehensive Map Amendment (CMA) that will implement the rezonings recommended in the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

The following objectives have been identified for the project:

•                     Implement many of the recommended land use actions identified in the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan, including implementing the Plan’s zoning recommendations.

•                     Accomplish goals from the city’s ongoing FAST Initiative, making the development review and permitting process Faster, Accountable, Smarter and Transparent.

•                     Incorporate planning and zoning best practices that have become common in the field of urban planning and in other similarly situated communities.

•                     Incorporate the city’s commitment to equity, resilience, and sustainability, as described in the 2021 Mayor and Council social justice resolution and the 2022 Climate Action Plan.

•                     Ensure compliance with current federal and state regulations.

•                     Create a modern ordinance that can accommodate the changing living, working, and lifestyles of the 21st century.

•                     Create a user-friendly, accessible, and well-organized document that provides appropriate graphics and information to aid in its understanding.

This work session is intended to focus on the following elements of the ongoing Zoning Ordinance Rewrite and Comprehensive Map Amendment project:

•                     New zones (including the High-Density Residential (RHD), and Town Center zones)

•                     Revisions to the development standards of existing zones

•                     Proposed height transition regulations, and

•                     Proposed rezonings recommended by the Comprehensive Plan.

Additional Commission work sessions are scheduled for June 11 (following up on the development review process), July 23 (Uses and Parking) and September 24 (a review of remaining topics, including parkland dedication, historic preservation, and signs, etc.).  The scheduled adoption for the new Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Zoning Map Amendment is Spring 2026.

Community Engagement

Community engagement and outreach for the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite and Comprehensive Map Amendment project began in Summer/Fall 2024 and is planned to continue through Summer 2025. A full report on community engagement for this project to date is found in Attachment 1 above - Community Engagement Summary.

New Zones

Mixed-Use Residential Office (MXRO)

The Comprehensive Plan recommends that certain properties within Planning Area 4 (West End and Woodley Gardens East-West) be rezoned to a new zone that limits uses to residential and office only. The properties recommended to be rezoned are in the eastern portion of Planning Area 4, adjacent to Town Center, and are largely currently zoned Mixed-Use Transition (MXT). A new zone, the Mixed-Use Residential Office (MXRO) Zone, was proposed to be established on these properties. However, the Mayor and Council determined at the May 5 work session that this rezoning should not be pursued because it represents a downzoning of the subject properties.

Residential High Density (RHD)

The Comprehensive Plan recommends that a new, high-density residential zone, limited to residential uses, is appropriate for certain properties within Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm). The properties recommended to be rezoned are those where the Rollins Park and Congressional Towers apartment communities are located. These properties are currently zoned primarily Residential Medium Density-25 (RMD-25), with one parcel zoned Residential-75 (R-75). A new zone, the Residential High-Density (RHD) zone, is recommended by staff to be established on these properties.

The RHD zone is proposed to have an allowable density of 50 dwelling units per acre (twice that of the RMD-25 Zone), which would be similar to the highest density residential-only zones in Gaithersburg and Montgomery County, which have zones with 54 and 43.5 dwelling units per acre, respectively. (Currently, the allowable density in the RMD-25 is 25 dwelling units per acre, while the R-75 Zone requires a minimum of 7,500 square feet per lot, which is approximately 6 dwelling units per acre). The maximum height is proposed to be 75 feet, which is the same as the RMD-25 Zone, while the R-75 Zone has a maximum height of 35 feet. To respond to resident concerns and to ensure appropriate height transitions from single-unit residential, staff is recommending that buildings be limited to a maximum height of 45 feet within 100 feet of the property line when the property abuts or confronts a lot that is zoned for and developed with single-unit residential uses. Side and rear setback requirements, as well as design and access requirements, are proposed to be consistent with those of the mixed-use zones that currently allow for higher-density residential.

Proposed development standards for the RHD are found in Table 1, below.

Table 1. Proposed Residential High Density Zone Development Standards

Standard	Requirement
Density (Max.)	50 dwelling units/acre
Lot Frontage (Min.)	10 ft.
Front Setback (Min.)	25 ft. when abutting or confronting a lot zoned for and developed with single-unit residential uses 10 ft. in all other locations
Side Setback	10 ft.
Rear Setback (Min.)	10 ft.
Building Height (Max.)	75 ft. When abutting or confronting a lot zoned for and developed with single-unit residential uses, buildings are limited to a max. height of 45 ft. within 100 ft. of the property line.
Access	For apartment dwellings, the mixed-use site access requirements apply.
Design Standards	For apartment dwellings, the mixed-use design standards apply.

At the May 5 work session, the Mayor and Council generally supported the proposed zone and associated standards.

Town Center Zones

On January 27, 2025, the Mayor and Council adopted the 2025 Rockville Town Center Master Plan (TCMP), as an amendment to the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The TCMP amends the Land Use Policy Map for Planning Area 1 and includes land use recommendations for three “character areas” within Town Center: the MD-355 Corridor, the Core, and the Edge. Specifically, TCMP Actions 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 recommend increased building heights and associated incentives, as well as no minimum parking requirements.

The Mayor and Council approved a zoning text amendment allowing the use of floating zones to implement the TCMP recommendations for the three character areas until the CMA is adopted. With the future adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance, staff is proposing a more permanent change by creating new zones. Staff proposes to use the ZOR and CMA to expand the Mixed-Use Transit District (MXTD) Zone to become a family of zones with height restrictions corresponding to the three TCMP character areas (Table 2, below). The MXTD zones are proposed to be distinguished by the allowable base heights recommended in the TCMP, and named MXTD-235, MXTD-200, and MXTD-85, accordingly. All zones within the MXTD family will have the same uses, setbacks, design, and other such standards, tailored to be more walkable and less auto oriented (the implementation of no minimum parking for these zones will be addressed at the July 23 work session on Uses and Parking). Specifically, no new drive-through uses would be allowed in these zones. 

Table 2. Proposed MXTD 'Family' of Zones

Character Area	Proposed Zone	Base Height	Bonus Height
MD-355 Corridor Character Area	MXTD-235	235 feet	100 feet
Core Character Area	MXTD-200	200 feet	100 feet
Edge Character Area	MXTD-85	85 feet	50 feet

At the May 5 work session, the Mayor and Council generally supported the proposed zones.

Revisions to Existing Zone Standards

Several revisions to development standards for existing zones to resolve issues, address inaccuracies and nonconformities, and to simplify and clarify, will be included with the release of the draft Zoning Ordinance. More substantive proposed changes are addressed below.

Residential Medium Density-Infill (RMD-Infill)

Revisions to the RMD-Infill Zone are proposed to ensure that the zone is effective in producing the outcomes intended by the Comprehensive Plan (which recommends flexibility for this zone to allow a diverse range of housing types) and to further align with the Mayor and Council’s Social Justice Resolution. Proposed revisions are also informed by meetings with community organizations, a focus group with affordable housing organizations, and individual conversations with small infill builders.

The APA Equity in Zoning Policy Guide Zoning District Policy 1 is to “Establish new residential zoning districts or amend existing residential districts to allow more types of housing by right.” Further, the Guide recommends:

“Avoid districts limited to only single-household detached dwellings when that will limit housing opportunities for historically disadvantaged and vulnerable populations. Evidence shows that single-household only residential zoning has a disproportionate impact on the ability of historically disadvantaged and vulnerable groups to access attainable housing and quality schools and services. Revise zoning to allowing a broader range of building forms, lot sizes, lot widths, and residential types in low-density residential neighborhoods.”

Under the Zoning Ordinance Rewrite, development within the RMD-Infill is proposed to be allowed on lots of any size and frontage width within the zone, so long as the development proposal meets the development standards. The proposal would continue to allow the development of duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes, and townhouses, and is proposed to also allow for the development of “cottage courts” (small-scale residential developments that consist of a cluster of small, detached or semi-detached cottages arranged around a shared courtyard). To achieve this type of housing, different setbacks, lot size, and other single-family type regulations need to be reduced. Development of no more than six units would be allowed on a single lot. Front yard coverage requirements would be removed, as these are more appropriate for the single unit detached zones and is atypical when compared to surrounding jurisdictions. The rear setback would be reduced from 20 feet to 5 feet; and building height maximums would be revised to the following:

•                     30 feet for cottage court development

•                     35 feet for duplex and triplex development (retained from the current Ordinance)

•                     40 feet for fourplex development

Revisions to the zone’s limited design standards will also be recommended. Proposed development standards for the RMD-Infill are found in Table 3, below.

Table 3. Proposed RMD-Infill Development Standards

Standard		Requirement
Density (Max.)		Min. 2,000 square feet per tract area per DU, but no more than 4 units per lot1 DU/2,000 sq. ft. but never more than 6 DUs per lot
Lot Size (min)		Min. Lot Area of 4,000 square feet n/a
Lot Frontage (Min.)		40 ft. n/a
Front Setback		20  15 ft. or the established setback, whichever is less
Side Setback	Abutting Street (Min.) 4	15 ft.
	Abutting Land (Min.)	5 ft.  Side setbacks can be reduced from the normal requirement of 5 ft. provided that the sum of both side setbacks is a minimum of 10 ft.
Rear Setback (Min.)		20 ft. 5 ft.
Building Height (Max.)		30 ft. for cottage courts
		35 ft. for duplexes and triplexes
		40 ft. for fourplexes
Front Yard Coverage	Single Frontage and Through Lots (Max. per front yard)	40%
	Corner Lots (Max. per frontage)	20%

Light Industrial (I-L)

The height maximum for the Light Industrial Zone is proposed to increase from 40 feet, to address the Comprehensive Plan recommendation to “[p]reserve light and service industrial land and uses to ensure that productive businesses thrive and provide employment and services to area residents” (Economic Development Element Policy 8) and related Action 8.1, “Ensure that City policies and regulations are supportive of the retention and growth of light and service industrial uses, where suitable.” Industry is an important component of the city’s economy, providing jobs, key services to the community, and relatively affordable spaces for small businesses and entrepreneurs. In recent years, growing market pressure for mixed-use and residential land uses has resulted in a loss of industrially zoned land in many municipalities. The city has limited land within the Light Industrial zone, and industrially zoned land can be highly sought-after. An increase in height could provide for additional potential floor area in the Light Industrial zone; preliminarily, staff recommended a height of 60 feet, which was supported by the Mayor and Council on May 5.

Height Maximums

Mixed-Use Transit District (MXTD)

In addition to the properties zoned or proposed to be zoned within the MXTD family of zones in Town Center, properties near the Twinbrook and Shady Grove metro stations are also zoned MXTD (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Currently, the base height in the MXTD is 120 feet, with a 30-foot bonus (for a total of 150 feet) that may be applied under certain conditions. Champion Projects in the MXTD Zone in the South Pike qualify for an 80-foot bonus height (up to 200 feet maximum).

Figure 1. MXTD Zone Near Twinbrook Metro

Figure 2. MXTD Property Near Shady Grove Metro

As noted above, the MXTD zone is proposed to be expanded to a new “family” of zones that will be used to implement the recommendations of the recently adopted Town Center Master Plan. As described above, the family of MXTD zones is proposed to have base and bonus heights consistent with the recommendations of the Town Center Master Plan (Table 1). In conjunction with the creation of the MXTD family, staff recommends that the MXTD-235 zone be applied to the MXTD properties near the Twinbrook and Shady Grove metro stations. This would effectively increase the base height of these properties from 120 to 235 feet. Staff also proposes that the 100-foot bonus height apply not only to projects in the MXTD-235 that include 20% or more affordable housing, but also to projects in the South Pike that qualify as Champion Projects.

Increasing the MXTD height would ensure that these properties are positioned to be similarly competitive to those in Town Center, and more competitive with transit-oriented properties in Montgomery County outside of the city. It would also better implement the Comprehensive Plan’s principle to “Steer the most-dense development to mixed-use, transit served locations” and the Climate Action Plan’s Action C-16 to “Implement the Comprehensive Plan to steer the densest development/redevelopment to mixed-use, transit-served locations, reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and emissions, and conserve/restore environmental areas.”

The Mayor and Council supported these recommendations on May 5.

Housing Expansion and Affordability Act

The State of Maryland’s Housing Expansion and Affordability Act (HB 538; HEAA) went into effect on January 1, 2025. Qualified projects under this act can be allowed to exceed allowable units under the  Zoning Ordinance and/or be exempted from certain requirements. The HEAA has several components, including benefits for “qualified projects” (generally, projects located on historic former state- or federal-owned campuses; projects located within 0.75 miles of a passenger rail station; or projects controlled by a nonprofit or located on land owned by a nonprofit). Qualified projects located within 0.75 miles of a passenger rail station must be deed-restricted to include 20% of housing units that are affordable for a period of at least 40 years, while projects developed by nonprofits must be deed-restricted to include 25% of the same.

Qualified projects are entitled to additional density, above what base zoning permits. In an area zoned for single family residential use, a qualified project may include middle housing units; this will be reflected in the updated Zoning Ordinance. Qualified projects are also entitled to an increase in allowable density in areas zoned for multifamily and mixed-use. Generally, the statutory language involving a density increase in multifamily and mixed-use zones states:

•                     In an area zoned exclusively for multifamily residential use, a qualified project shall have a density limit that exceeds by 30% the allowable density in that zone.

•                     In an area zoned for mixed-use, a qualified project may include 30% more housing units than are allowed in that zone.

While the medium- and high-density residential zones control intensity through a standard “density” calculation based on the number of dwelling units allowed per acre, most the city’s high-density residential development is occurring in the mixed-use zones, which do not control intensity by utilizing a density calculation of dwelling units per acre but instead control intensity through setback and height restrictions. To address HEAA density increase requirements, staff propose bonus heights of 30% above what the base zones allow in all MX zones. In the MXTD family of zones within Town Center, qualified projects would be afforded bonus heights above those required by the HEAA, as they would receive the height bonuses described in the New Zones section of this staff report.

Design Requirements

Under the current Zoning Ordinance, certain zones (most notably the mixed-use zones) are subject to not only development standards (building height, setbacks) but also design requirements that go beyond what can be built to address what buildings should look like and ensure high quality design. These standards address façade treatments, architectural elements, roof design, materials, and similar features.

While the design requirements contained within the Zoning Ordinance help to ensure visual appeal of development within the mixed-use zones, staff have identified that improvements need to be made to increase the clarity, specificity, and enforceability of design requirements. The requirements are currently a combination of “standards” (required items, typically denoted by “must,” “will,” “permitted,” or similar; e.g., Sec. 25.13.06.b.5, “Building design must include design elements which clearly indicate to customers where the entrances are located”) and “guidelines” (encouraged items, typically denoted by “should”; e.g., Sec. 25.13.06.b.2, “Roof design should provide variations in rooflines where appropriate”). Standards are legally enforceable, whereas guidelines can be understood as suggestions and preferences which lack the force of law.

The new Zoning Ordinance proposes to convert the design guidelines to standards and to increase the standards’ clarity and specificity. This will increase the clarity and enforceability of the design-related elements of the Zoning Ordinance. To this end, the ZOR is working to identify and retain necessary and useful design requirements, and to replace subjective language with objective criteria. For example, terms such as “aesthetically pleasing” and “visual character” are proposed to be replaced with requirements that clearly define what is desired (e.g., Sec. 25.13.06.b.5, “Building design must include design elements which clearly indicate to customers where the entrances are located and which add aesthetically pleasing character to buildings by providing highly visible customer entrances” is proposed to be revised to “The primary building entrance must be clearly defined and accessible. Primary building entrances must include design features such as canopies, awnings, or porches that enhance the pedestrian experience and offer shelter.”).

With the proposed increased clarity of design requirements, the ZOR also proposes to introduce provisions for “alternative compliance.” Alternative compliance provisions allow flexibility for architects and designers to meet the intent of design standards through alternate proposals that provide equivalent or greater levels of design. Alternative compliance ensures that designers can exercise creativity and innovation and accommodate unique site conditions. As a point of reference, the East Rockville Design Guidelines include alternative compliance provisions.

Height Transitions

The Zoning Ordinance Rewrite recommends updated requirements for height transitions between single-unit residential and higher-intensity uses. These new requirements would replace height transition regulations in several sections of our current ordinance including replacement of the “layback slope” regulations. The proposal is intended to ensure appropriate transitions between higher-density development and single-unit detached neighborhoods, while balancing policies from the Comprehensive Plan, Town Center Master Plan, and Climate Action Plan regarding intense development around Metro stations, as well as housing production goals.

Under the proposal, any building greater than 50 feet in height within higher-intensity zones would be required to incorporate a height transition along the façade(s) that abut or confront lots zoned for and developed with single-unit residential in lower-intensity zones (Table 4, below). Buildings subject to transition requirements would be required to incorporate one or two building setbacks (or “step backs”) along the façade(s) that abut or confront residential (as described above), depending upon the height of the building. A step back is an architectural design feature where a building’s upper floors are recessed from the lower floors, thereby creating a stepped or recessed building profile.

For buildings exceeding 50 feet tall, a ten-foot step back would be required above the second floor. This step back is intended to correspond to the roofline of smaller nearby structures, reducing the scale of the proposed building while emphasizing its ground-level elements. For buildings that exceed 85 feet tall, an additional step back would be required at 85 feet to further ease the transition. The step back would apply along the portion of the building facade that abuts or confronts properties as listed in Table 4. Buildings under 50 feet tall would not be required to have the step back, as a height of 50 feet provides a logical transition from the 35- to 45-foot height maximums of the residential zones.  The ZOR proposes that height transitions would not apply to lots that confront one another across the Metro/CSX right-of-way, MD-355, or I-270, as these rights-of-way serve as significant physical barriers between development.

Table 4. Proposed Application of Height Transitions Requirements

Height Transitions Apply to:	When abutting or confronting properties developed with single-unit, duplex, or townhouse dwellings in the…
MXTD-235	• R-400 • R-200 • R-150 • R-90 • R-75 • R-60 • R-40 • RMD-Infill • RMD-10 • RMD-15
MXTD-200
MXTD-85
MXCD
MXCT
MXE
MXB
MXNC
RMD-25
I-H
I-L

Staff does not recommend requiring a height transition to or from the MXC, MXT, or Park zone. Currently, the MXC and MXT do not require and are not subject to a layback slope and a layback slope from the Park zone is applied only to abutting RMD-25 properties. The MXT (Mixed-Use Transition) Zone itself has historically served as a transition zone between lower and higher intensity uses, and the built form of the zone is not anticipated to change. Staff anticipate that the park buffer requirements currently included in the city’s Environmental Guidelines will be retained and does not recommend applying height transitions from Park zones.

The recommended height transition requirements would take the place of conflicting transition requirements currently existing within the city’s Zoning Ordinance, most notably including:

•                     Layback slopes (generally, a line extending 30 degrees from grade at the property line of an abutting or confronting residentially-zoned lot onto a mixed-use, industrial, or RMD-25 property; Figure 6, below)

•                     Setbacks that are based on the height of a proposed building (e.g., development within the Mixed-Use Transit District/MXTD must have rear and side setbacks of the normal 25 feet or the height of the proposed building, whichever is greater when abutting residential property)

The layback slope and setback existing requirements place difficult restrictions on properties that are intended for dense development, and undermining the ability to achieve the residential densities included in the city’s adopted plans. Additionally, the layback slope is difficult to understand and interpret - not only for applicants, but also for city staff and members of the public.  

Figure 4. Layback Slope Example (Image 13.1 from the Current Zoning Ordinance)

Below is an example of applying the layback slope to a property allowed to have a building height of 85 feet with a bonus height of 50 feet based upon the recently adopted Town Center Master Plan.  With the layback slope from the adjacent townhouse property, an 85-foot-high building could only be located on the front 1/3^rd of the property with no ability to achieve the bonus height. 

The Mayor and Council supported the staff recommendation for height transitions.

Comprehensive Map Amendment

The language of the city’s Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 25 of the City Code) and the city’s zoning map work together to implement the city’s zoning regulations. Land within the city is divided into different zoning districts (or “zones”), each of which has its own requirements. The city’s zoning map visually displays the zone assigned to each property in the city, which can be cross-referenced with the use and development regulations for each zone contained within the Zoning Ordinance. 

Comprehensive Plan Recommended Rezonings

The Mayor and Council adopted the Rockville 2040 Comprehensive Plan in 2021. Among its many recommendations related to land use and zoning, the Plan includes recommendations to rezone certain properties (described in detail later in this staff report). These recommended rezonings underwent an extensive public engagement process during the Comprehensive Plan, and further targeted engagement has occurred with this project.  

Maryland courts have affirmed that Sections 1-302 and 3-303 of the Maryland Land Use Article, when read together, require that zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, and similar statutes must “further, and not be contrary to” provisions of the jurisdiction’s comprehensive plan that implement visions set out in Land Use Article Section 1-201 as well as the elements of the plan addressing development regulations and sensitive areas.¹ This includes the Plan’s zoning recommendations. As such, a significant effort of the ongoing project is to rezone properties as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan through a Comprehensive Map Amendment. 

The Comprehensive Plan recommends rezoning properties to reflect changing community needs and allow for planned land uses. A total of 606 properties, which the Comprehensive Plan organizes into “Focus Areas”, are proposed to be rezoned to implement the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan.

Rezoning to new zones

The Plan includes recommendations that properties be rezoned to new zones that had not yet been created at the time of Plan adoption. These recommendations are as follows:

•                     A new zone that limits uses to residential and office only (the Mayor and Council have directed not to create this zone);

•                     A new, high-density residential zone, limited to residential uses; and

•                     A new zone that allows a diverse range of housing types, including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and rowhouses, in addition to single-unit detached dwellings.

In a portion of Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm), the plan recommends that a new, high-density residential zone would be appropriate in the areas currently zoned RMD-25 and that contain existing apartments. A zone that meets this description currently does not exist. Initially, the staff’s proposal was to utilize an existing mixed-use zone to implement this recommendation, as this will be the only location in the city where the new, high-density residential-only zone will be implemented. However, following community engagement and further consideration, staff determined that, to be most consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendation, a new, high-density residential zone should be developed and implemented in the location where this recommendation applies.

Rezoning to existing zones

In many instances, the Comprehensive Plan recommends that a property be rezoned to an existing zone. For example, a recommendation may read simply, “Rezone to MXCD [Mixed-Use Corridor District]”. In some of these cases, the Plan provides additional supporting information; in other instances, the recommendation stands on its own. In most of these cases, staff proposes to implement zoning that agrees with the Plan’s recommended zoning. In one case (in Focus Area 1 of Planning Area 10), the staff’s recommendation differs. This is called out in the section below, and an explanation is provided.

One existing zone of note is the RMD-Infill (Residential Medium Density - Infill) zone, which was created in 2021 through the Stonestreet Master Plan process to implement that plan’s recommendation for “a new zone that allows a diverse range of housing types, including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and rowhouses, in addition to single-unit detached dwellings.” With the Stonestreet Master Plan, several properties in East Rockville near the Rockville Metro Station were rezoned to this district. The Comprehensive Plan recommends expanding this “new zone” to a number of properties that are currently zoned for single-unit detached residential development only. These areas are particularly located near existing Metro stations and planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stops. Additional information related to this zone recommendation is as follows:

•                     Recommendation to rezone to a new zone that allows a diverse range of housing types, including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and rowhouses, in addition to single-unit detached dwellings.

This zone currently allows residential development, including single-unit detached, duplex, triplex, and quadplex. These housing types are referred to as ‘middle’ housing because their density falls between single-unit detached development and mid- to high-rise apartment development (Figure 1). They are also sometimes called ‘missing middle’ housing, as this type of development has been less common since the 1940s.   

Figure 5. Missing middle housing types in context

Missing middle housing types are intended to be ‘house-scale’ (i.e., comparable in scale and form with single-unit detached housing), and to fit into existing residential neighborhoods (Figure 2). The zone has height limits that are generally in keeping with those in the city’s single-unit residential zones. By providing property owners the flexibility to develop or redevelop at a slightly greater density, it could provide a spectrum of affordability to address the city’s increasing housing demand. 

Current uses and standards for the RMD-Infill can be found in Section 25.11.03-04 of the City Code. Through the ZOR, updates to this zone’s uses and development standards are anticipated to be recommended so that the zone more effectively addresses Comprehensive Plan goals to increase flexibility to achieve diverse housing.

 
Figure 6. Missing middle housing examples (clockwise from top left: stacked duplex; cottage court; quadplex; quadplex; fiveplex; side-by-side duplex)

Recommended rezonings which are not proposed to be pursued through the CMA

The Comprehensive Plan also includes rezonings which are not proposed to be pursued through the Comprehensive Map Amendment. These generally fall into three categories. They are a) recommended rezonings that already been implemented, either through the Stonestreet Master Plan process or through the application of the floating zone; b) recommended rezonings that will have been superseded by the adoption of the Town Center Master Plan; or c) rezonings which are recommended only if certain conditions were met (typically the development of a BRT station).

Specific Proposed Rezonings Resulting from Comprehensive Plan Recommendations 

The locations of proposed rezonings are generally shown below. Specific information related to staff’s proposed rezonings resulting from the Comprehensive Plan’s recommended rezonings is found in Attachment 2 - Proposed Rezonings to Implement Comprehensive Plan Recommendations.

For a full description of existing and proposed zones within the city, see Attachment 3 above - Descriptions of All Existing and Proposed Zones. 

Figure 7. Citywide proposed rezonings resulting from Comprehensive Plan recommendations

During the January 27, 2025, Mayor and Council work session on the Comprehensive Map Amendment, the Mayor and Council requested additional information on select rezonings proposed in the following planning areas:

•                     Planning Area 3 (Hungerford, New Mark Commons, Lynfield, and Fireside Park)

•                     Planning Area 4 (West End and Woodley Gardens E-W)

•                     Planning Area 6 (Lincoln Park)

•                     Planning Area 8 (Twinbrook and Twinbrook Forest)

•                     Planning Area 10 (Montrose and North Farm)

•                     Planning Area 16 (King Farm and Shady Grove)

Requested information related to these rezonings, as well as an overview of the role of Mayor and Council and community feedback in the CMA is found in Attachment 2, Comprehensive Map Amendment Work Session Follow-Up Information.

Jerusalem Mt. Pleasant Methodist Church and the Lincoln Park community continued to express concerns about the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations for rezonings proposed on their properties and in their community (respectively). More information on the proposed rezonings and community input can be found in Attachment 2, Comprehensive Map Amendment Work Session Follow-Up Information.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the items described above and provide feedback as desired.