Planning Commission continues Baylor University rezoning after neighborhood traffic, notice concerns

The City of Waco Planning Commission on Jan. 28 voted to continue consideration of a rezoning request from Baylor University after neighborhood concerns about notice timing and traffic impacts.

The proposal, presented as a request to rezone roughly 3.37 acres from R-1B to O-2 for property described as Lot 1, Block 2 of the Edgefield Park addition (known as 90 Bagby Avenue; Property ID 171627), was introduced to the commission by Bernadette Hookham of RBDR Architects on behalf of Patrick J. Carley of Baylor University.

The request would change the property's zoning category; Planning Services recommended approval, saying the proposed zoning aligns with the comprehensive plan, the public infrastructure is adequate and the site meets area and width requirements for O-2 zoning. Planning staff also stated 29 mailed notices were sent with zero returns at the time the staff report was prepared.

The matter drew a public speaker, Charlie Bayless, who identified himself as a Baylor faculty member and a resident at 1704 Plum Circle adjacent to the parcel. Bayless said he and neighbors received notice late — he said the mailed notice arrived the prior week and he only became aware of the meeting on Saturday — and asked the commission to delay action to allow more neighborhood input. He told the commission he had two children under age 5 and raised specific safety concerns if traffic to the site grows. "Right now, Bagby Avenue ... has only 1,600 vehicles per day. That's over — that's an over 2 times increase in the traffic," Bayless said, adding that an online report he reviewed indicated an increase to about 2,000 vehicles per day.

Bayless also disputed a staff finding that O-2 zoning is adjacent to the subject property, saying the parcel across Bagby is O-2 but the property directly adjacent on the neighborhood side is R-1B. He asked the commission to request more information from Baylor and to deny or postpone action until neighborhood members have had adequate notice and opportunity to respond.

Commissioners asked staff when notices were mailed; staff replied Jan. 17. After discussion, Commissioner Smith moved to continue the item to the next meeting; Commissioner Givens seconded. The commission reopened the public hearing before taking the continuation motion and then voted to continue the item. The recorded roll call on the continuance showed the following votes: Allen (yes), Campbell (yes), Embry (yes), Givens (yes), Ingram (yes), Smith (yes), Cole (yes).

Because the item was continued, no final zoning decision or conditions were adopted by the commission at the Jan. 28 meeting.

The record shows neighborhood notice timing, projected traffic increases cited by a resident, and that the applicant’s representative was present. The commission did not adopt any new requirements, conditions or mitigations before continuing the case.

Planning staff or Baylor representatives did not provide additional traffic modeling or a written neighborhood outreach plan on the record before the continuation.

The item will return to a future Planning Commission meeting for further consideration; no date for the resumed hearing was stated on the record at the Jan. 28 session.