Joint Meeting City Council and the Plan Commission September 1st, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

September 1st, 2015

Joint Meeting City Council and the Plan Commission

1

“The City Plan Commission shall recommend a City Plan for the physical development of the City…”

Article IX Section 2 of the City of Waco Charter

2

Comprehensive Plan History

• 1958 Inner-City Redevelopment
• 1967 A New Image for Waco
• 1983 Improving the Quality of Development
• 2000 Preserve and Improve the Quality of Life
• Recently (2000 – 2015)

– Imagine Waco: A Plan for Greater Downtown – Near North Side Master Plan – Future Land Use for McLennan County – Community Visioning Project – Economic Development Plan-Upjohn Plan – Thoroughfare Plan Waco Metropolitan Area – Downtown Transportation Plan

3

Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development

Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainability addresses the following issues:

• More efficient use of increasingly scarce resources
• Fiscal Sustainability
• Healthier and safer communities
• Protection of the environment
• Preservation of open space
• Improved mobility
• Shared benefits

4

Initial Citizen Participation

• Fall 2014 - Staff conducted 4 standard public input

meetings at various locations around Waco.

• Conducted continuous online public input process

consisting of: – Surveys – Questionnaires – Interactive maps – Citizen idea submission – Photo surveys

5

Issues

1. Poverty reduction 2. Workforce development 3. Targeted job creation 4. Employment accessibility 5. Neighborhood diversity 6. Public health 7. Education 8. Downtown/Riverfront development

• 9. Neighborhood

revitalization

• 10. Resource conservation
• 11. Open space preservation
• 12. Flood plain and wetlands

protection

• 13. Historic preservation
• 14. Urban sprawl prevention
• 15. Optimum mobility

6

Components of the Comprehensive Plan

• Goals and Objectives
• Economic Development
• Growth Management
• Transportation
• Utilities
• Housing
• Livability
• Environment
• Implementation

7

Economic Development

8

Percent of City Population Living Up to 200%

• f Poverty, 2007-2012 (excludes students)

9

10

Metropolitan Waco Commuting Patterns

Employed Residents 42,535 Living and Working in the City 22,017 City Employment 67,017

Recommendations

• Bring Jobs to City Residents

– Encourage manufacturers to locate in the inner city, which would directly alleviate the transportation barrier faced by many residents – The parcel could also be located near existing daycare centers, resolving another key barrier – The development would improve the city’s tax base

11

Map 2.3: Potential Employment Centers and Persons Living Below Census Defined Poverty Level

12

Growth Management

13

14

City of Waco and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Change in Developed Uses: 1995 to 2003

Location of Acreage Developed Since 1995 by Jurisdiction*

*Within McLennan County

15

Change in Percentage of County Population: 1970 to 2010

16

30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0% 55.0% 60.0% 65.0% 70.0% 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 City of Waco Outside of Waco

McLennan County Independent School District Boundaries

17

18

Projected Population Change: 2010 to 2040 – Trend Scenario Traffic Analysis Zones

19

Projected Population Change: 2010 to 2040 – City Plan Adopted Scenario Traffic Analysis Zones

Major Issues Addressed by the Land Use Plan

• Poverty
• Aging / Inadequate Infrastructure
• Suburban / Exurban growth
• Increasing demand for city services
• Declining resources

20

Land Use Plan Categories

• Rural Residential

– Low Density, Low Impact Development – Focus on Open Space Preservation – Density bonuses for Cluster Development

• Low Density Residential

– Single-Family Residential – Varying lot sizes up to 10 units per acre – Limited compatible uses providing services

Medium Density Residential Office Flex

– Mix of residential types – Limited office & neighborhood commercial – Walkable scale, support public transit

21

Land Use Plan Categories

• Office Industrial Flex

– Mix of compatible office, commercial & light industrial uses – Limited high density residential – Jobs to People

• Mixed Use Flex

– Mix of retail, office & high density residential – Walkable scale, support public transit

• Mixed Use Core

– City Center – Mix of very high density residential with office and supportive retail – Highly walkable – Preservation of historic structures & adaptive reuse

22

Land Use Plan Categories

• Industrial

– Nuisance-free industrial uses & compatible commercial or office

• Institutional

– Educational and medical facilities located on large campuses.

• Open Space

– Parks & Recreational Areas – Flood zone risk areas

23

Land Use Location Considerations

• Existing Development vs. Vacant Land
• Flood Plain / Escarpment
• Existing & Proposed Transportation

– Arterial & Freeway Thoroughfares – Bicycle & Pedestrian – Transit Routes

• Utilities – Existing & Proposed
• Access

– Employment Centers – Childcare – Healthcare – Recreation

24

25

Map 3.4: Land Use Plan Designations Within Waco Corporate Limits

26

Land Use Plan Designations Waco Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

Development Nodes

• Purpose

– Focus areas for new future residential & employment – Mix of commercial, office, medium density residential – Scale of each node intended to be walkable & bicycle friendly – Future population and employment density at a level which supports public transit

27

Development Nodes

• General Location Criteria

– Mix of Urban & Suburban environments – Geographical dispersed – Representative of a range of demographics – Basic infrastructure and services exist or in close proximity

28

30

Proposed Development Nodes

Residential, 3.1% Commercial & Office, 14.7% Industrial, 8.0% Vacant, 23.4% Park, 4.1% Right of Way, 26.6% Other Developed, 15.8%

2013 Land Use within Downtown Development Node

31

Residential, 29.4% Commercial & Office, 0.9% Industrial, 0.3% Vacant, 2.3% Park, 0.0% Right of Way, 21.4% Agriculture, 42.6% Other Developed, 0.7% Other Undeveloped, 0.7%

2013 Land Use within South Bosque Development Node

32

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Walkability Index by Development Node

Current Short-Term Goal Long-Term Goal 34

Growth Areas

• Purpose

– Ensure that future growth patterns reinforce guiding principles, goals & objectives of the Plan

• Sustainability

– Identify priorities for future population and growth – Serve as a guide for the provision of infrastructure and city services – Contribute to the drafting of the City’s Capital Improvements Program and Budget

35

36

Growth Area Recommendations

Growth Management Recommendation

• Encourage Sustainable Development Practices
• Changes to zoning & subdivision ordinance
• Provide flexibility in design and plan conformity bonuses
• Cluster Development
• Preservation of Open Space & Rural Uses
• Residential density provided through clustering of

developments

• Consider Adoption of Impact Fees
• New development pays for costs associated with expansion of

public infrastructure

• One-time charge applied to new development

37

Growth Management Recommendation

• Expand the use of Public Improvement Districts and

Tax Increment Financing

• Revise Design Criteria for Economic Incentives
• Insure development contributes to long term stability of

neighborhoods

• Consider Adoption of Stormwater Utility Fee

38

Growth Management Recommendation

• Develop Capital Improvements Programs that support

achievement of the goals and objectives of The City Plan

• Adopt set of weighted criteria to give priority to sustainable

projects

• Utilize “whole life” costing
• Revise Annexation Policy
• Advance Coordination with Property Owners
• Development of Service Plan for Infrastructure and Service

Extensions

• Evaluate Fiscal Impact

39

Transportation

40

Thoroughfare Plan

• Adopted in 2013
• Identify future thoroughfare corridors

– Location, alignment and function

• Identify appropriate design characteristics

– Context Sensitive Solutions – Design recommendations vary by neighborhood context

41

42

43

Waco Regional Thoroughfare Plan Thoroughfare Classifications & Area Types Waco Urbanized Area

Selected Bicycle & Pedestrian Design Elements

Strategy City Center Urban Suburban Rural Sidewalks on both sides of the Street

Desirable Desirable Desirable May be Appropriate

Median Refuge Areas

Appropriate Appropriate Appropriate Not Appropriate

Reduced Corner Radius

Desirable Appropriate May be Appropriate Not Appropriate

Bicycle Lanes Desirable

Desirable Appropriate May be Appropriate

Paved Shoulders

Not Appropriate Not Appropriate May be Appropriate Desirable

Bicycle Parking

Desirable Desirable May be Appropriate May be Appropriate

44

Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)

• Identify regional transportation goals
• Identify projects to be constructed or implemented by 2040

– Projects that help achieve plan goals – Includes regionally significant projects from each mode

• Highways, Public Transportation, Aviation, Rail

– Inclusion required for federally funded highway & transit projects

• Projects must be constrained against a realistic estimate of

future revenues

45

MTP Primary Challenges

• 1. Further dispersion of population and employment to

suburban and rural areas

• 2. Concentration of poverty within urban core
• 3. Limited financial resources
• 4. Air Quality

46

McLennan County Percent of Workers with Travel Times greater than 60 Minutes by Mode

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% Drove Alone Carpool Public Transportation Walked Other Total All Modes Source: US Dept of Commerce; Bureau of the Census – American Community Survey 2008 to 2012

47

MTP Draft Project Recommendations

• Strategy 1: Strategic Highway Expansions

– Top Priority: IH-35 reconstruction through Waco

• Strategy 2: Maintain Existing Infrastructure in State of

Good Repair

• Strategy 3: Improve Connectivity to Essential Services

– Realignment of Waco Transit System

• Strategy 4: Reduce Transportation Related Injuries and

Fatalities

• Strategy 5: Maximize System Efficiency
• Strategy 6: Improve Regional Livability

48

49

Map 8.2: Conceptual Realignment of Waco Transit Fixed Route System

50

Map 4.2: Regionally Significant Highway Projects

51

Map 8.6: Strategy 6: Regional Livability Priority Corridors – Bicycle Facilities

52

Map 8.6: Strategy 6: Regional Livability Priority Corridors – Pedestrian Facilities

Other Transportation Priorities

• Pavement Management System
• Traffic Signals
• Expanded Bicycle & Pedestrian Networks
• Passenger Rail

– Downtown Depot – Transit Oriented Development

53

Utilities

54

Utility Infrastructure

• Same balanced population growth projections as
• ther plan sections
• Evaluation of impact to future water supply
• Consistency with growth management

recommendations

• Focus on improvements to existing infrastructure

55

56

Water CIP Projects by Type & Estimated Cost

2020 Plan, $122,847,670 2030 Plan, $47,340,200 2040 Plan, $82,486,100 Renewal, $34,441,060

WMARSS

Wastewater CIP Projects by Type & Estimated Cost

TOTAL: $240,000,000

WMARSS $53,928,000 22.5% Lift Station $14,928,000 6.2% Asset Renewal $112,272,000 46.8% Gravity Sewer / Force Main $54,240,000 22.6 % Rehabilitation $4,632,000 1.9%

57

58

Map 5.1: Proposed Water Utility Improvements

59

Map 5.2: Proposed Wastewater Utility Improvements

Stormwater

• 2003 Plan identified $35 million in projects
• Plan never implemented

– Severe drought since 2009 – No funding source or revenue stream

• Recommend establishment of stormwater utility fee

60

Stormwater Capital Costs from 2003 Plan

Conveyance $14,332,679 40% Buyouts $1,993,548 6% Planning $2,548,300 7% Regional Detention $17,067,031 47%

61

Housing

62

Neighborhood & Housing Context

• Neighborhood

– One of the most important considerations in selecting a place to live – More than a sum of structures. Defined by a sense

• f community and livability enjoyed by its

residents

• Housing and Neighborhood Development are

inextricably connected

63

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Highway 84 Corridor China Spring West Waco Remainder of Waco Number of Lots

Total Lots vs. Built Lots: 1994 to 2011 City of Waco

Houses Built Available Lots 64

65

Residential Subdivisions Submitted Since 1994 City of Waco and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

66

Total Residential Building Permits 2007 to 2014 by Census Tract

67

Vacant Property Available for Development – 2013

68

Residential Structures Tagged for Repairs – 2015

40.0% 45.0% 50.0% 55.0% 60.0% 65.0% 1970 1980 1990 2000 2009-2013

Percent Owner-Occupied Housing Units City of Waco: 1970 to Present

69

$500 $700 $900 $1,100 $1,300 $1,500 $1,700 Waco McLennan County State of Texas United States Peer City Average Peer County Average

Median Mortgage Costs & Gross Rent: 2009 to 2013 Average

Gross Rent Mortgage 70

20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% Waco McLennan County State of Texas United States Peer City Average Peer County Average

Housing Costs as a Percent of Household Income: 2009 to 2013 Average

Owner Occupied Renter Occupied 71

Housing Cost Burden

• Households spending greater than 30% of

income on housing

– 35.1% of all Waco households – 48.1% of moderate income ($56,188) – 73.8% of low income ($41,600) – 70.3% of extremely low income ($15,600) – Total of 14,600 low to moderate income households

72

73

Single Family Housing Units Constructed or Rehabilitated by Non-Profits

Proposed Strategies

Neighborhood Preservation Maintain & Restore / Rehab Restore / Rehab & Redevelop Development & Redevelopment Guidance Urban Core District

74

75

Proposed Residential Strategy Areas

Housing Recommendations

• Amend the land use plan and zoning ordinance to

encourage more mixed use development

• Strengthen building code and zoning ordinance

enforcement

• Implement a periodic inspection program for

residential rental properties

• Adopt guidelines for the sale of tax foreclosed and

City owned properties

• Consider using Public Improvement Districts or

Reinvestment Zones to stabilize neighborhoods

76

Livability

77

Livability

“Livability is the sum of the factors that add up to a community’s quality of life: including the built and natural environments; economic prosperity; health and safety; social stability; educational opportunity; and cultural, entertainment and recreational possibilities.”

• Partners for Livable Communities

78

Livability Categories

• Parks and Recreation
• Urban Design

– Streetscape & Walkability – Connectivity – Building Form – Historic Preservation – Preservation of Rural Character

• Arts & Culture
• Public Health

79

Environment

80

Environment Categories

• Climate
• Low Impact Development
• Water Conservation & Quality
• Energy Conservation
• Air Quality
• Waste Management

81

Air Quality

• Waco enjoys good air quality
• Region is has been close to maximum allowable

levels of ozone

• High ozone levels are a known threat to human health
• EPA has proposed implementation of new lower
• zone standards
• Metro Areas violating EPA standards are required to

identify strategies to return to compliance

82

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 2007 - 2009 2008 - 2010 2009 - 2011 2010 - 2012 2011 - 2013 2012 - 2014*

Parts per Billion 3 year Reporting Periods

Waco 8-hour Ozone Design Values: 2007 to 2014

3 Year Design Value Current EPA Standard Discussed Standard 83

Implementation Recommendations

• Plan Commission continue as the advisory

committee for the Plan and implementation.

• Plan be updated every 5 years.
• Annual implementation report with priorities.
• Future planning effort should be consistent

with the Comprehensive Plan

• Implementation efforts should go through a

vigorous public involvement period.

84

Implementation

• All zoning, subdivision, development and

CIP decisions should be evaluated for conformance of the Plan.

– Overhaul of zoning, subdivision and development ordinances needed – Creation of a CIP scoring matrix based on the Plan

85

Next Steps

• Draft Plan available
• Public Comment Period during Sept. and

October

• Neighborhood Meetings
• Public Meetings
• Sept. 24th, 28th & 29th
• Plan Commission Action in October
• City Council Action in November

86