Council narrowly approves NEZ roadway-fee waiver for Cotton Mill redevelopment

McKinney City Council on Tuesday approved a request from developer Presidium to retain and redirect roadway impact fees within a Neighborhood Empowerment Zone (NEZ) for a four‑building multifamily redevelopment at the historic Cotton Mill site.

Planning manager Cassie Bongler told the council staff recommended denial because the proposed buildings’ height, massing and scale did not meet the NEZ architectural guidelines. "The buildings are tall, wide, and take up the majority of the open space on all of these parcels," Bongler said during her presentation, citing NEZ provisions on proportion and massing tied to section 98-85 standards.

Presidium’s president of development (transcript: "josh aims") argued the exemption is necessary to make the district buildable and to fund essential infrastructure. He said the overall project could unlock more than $575 million in private investment, create roughly 2,800 jobs and generate what he estimated as $192 million in city and ISD tax revenue and $826 million in economic impact over 20 years. "We view this as an ask to let us put more of the private capital that we are intending to bring in directly into the district itself," he said.

Councilmembers pressed staff and the developer on whether prior site‑plan design exceptions already addressed compatibility; staff responded that NEZ eligibility requires compatibility in several dimensions, not just height. One councilmember said the project aligns with the town‑center revitalization strategy and supported the full waiver; another said the city should not shift what they estimated as roughly $3 million in roadway costs to taxpayers. After debate, council approved the waiver by a 4-3 vote.

The approval allows impact‑fee revenues tied to this project to be used within the NEZ to fund infrastructure improvements the developer and staff described as necessary to make later phases of the project feasible. Council did not attach additional conditions in the motion as read aloud at the meeting. The developer indicated willingness to amend its LOI to commit those funds to district infrastructure if council requires that in future documentation.

The council’s action was procedural and limited to NEZ eligibility and impact‑fee treatment; site‑plan approvals and other design exceptions were treated as separate items that had been approved earlier in the project’s regulatory history.