Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waco staff asks council: "Do we want subdivisions or do we want neighborhoods?" Connectivity, sidewalks and traffic-calming on the table
Summary
City planning staff outlined tools to turn subdivisions into walkable neighborhoods — a connectivity index, required stub connections, sidewalk timing and traffic-calming options — and asked council for feedback and developer input before drafting ordinance changes.
At a Dec. 2 work session the Waco City Council heard a presentation from Clint Peters, director of development services, and assistant director Laura Wagstaff on options to make new residential development more walkable and neighborhood-oriented. Peters opened with the framing question: "Do we want subdivisions or do we want neighborhoods?" and said the answer would shape street patterns, pedestrian access and how residents experience new developments.
Staff proposed several tools used in peer Texas cities: a connectivity index target (staff referenced a target range of 1.3'1.4 to support walkability), minimum required connections to adjacent stub streets, block-length limits with mid-block pedestrian connections, and a traffic-calming "toolbox" that can include roundabouts, curb extensions, narrower lane widths, street trees and on-street parking. Peters emphasized the need to balance connectivity with traffic calming and described "connected curvilinear" street patterns that provide aesthetic slowing of vehicles without sacrificing access.
On sidewalks, staff noted that Waco currently does not require sidewalks on many residential local streets outside collectors and arterials and suggested requiring a pedestrian connectivity plan at the preliminary-plat stage and refining when sidewalks must be installed (for example, percentage thresholds for developer-installed sidewalks so early buyers receive expected pedestrian connections). Council members raised questions about developer costs and who bears maintenance responsibility after acceptance; staff said practices vary across cities and cost impacts would need to be discussed with the development community.
Peters told council that staff's priority order for potential changes would begin with sidewalk timing and location refinements, then work on a connectivity index, curvilinear standards and the traffic-calming menu, with developer outreach through existing monthly developer meetings. Council members generally praised the approach but cautioned about cost impacts on housing affordability and asked staff to bring peer-city data and cost analyses when returning with proposals.
Next steps: staff will continue technical work, engage developers and return with draft ordinance language and implementation timing. No ordinance changes were adopted at the meeting; the presentation was for feedback and direction.
