By Samantha Smith

Division over a cost-sharing concept within a possible ordinance crafting a traffic calming policy led the Buda City Council earlier this month to table the item for further review. 

Buda council’s decision to hold off on the ordinance came after David Payne, a representative from Freese and Nichols, gave an explanation to council regarding the proposed policy. 

Payne said Freese and Nichols based the proposed ordinance off of previous citizen feedback at Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission meetings, as well as other Texas cities that have adopted similar ordinances.

Buda’s proposed traffic-calming ordinance would be set up in a step-by-step, four level system. The traffic-calming ordinance only applies to residential streets or collector roads like West Goforth Road. 

Traffic calming is designed to “change undesired motorist behavior,” Payne said, and can be accomplished through many different approaches. That includes adding traffic calming features such as speed humps.

The traffic calming features and education would be available through an application process for citizens, so it would be completely citizen driven, Payne said.

The proposed ordinance calls for the city to be responsible for financing traffic calming measures at levels 1 and 2, which includes speed trailers, educational components, dynamic radar signs, rumble strips and additional road striping. 

Levels 3 and 4 of the proposed ordinance, which could call for extensive measures such as temporary or permanent blocking off of intersactions and infrastructure changes, call for a cost-sharing model. 

Payne said interested citizen entities or neighborhoods would cover a portion of the cost of the traffic calming measure. The city would then be responsible for financing the remaining portion.

Within the proposed ordinance, there is a point system that prioritizes traffic calming projects. It also determines what percentage of the overall cost would be covered by the city and which costs citizens who requested them would cover. 

Chance Sparks, Buda Director of Planning, said the Buda P&Z forwarded the agenda item to council with the recommendation to adopt without a cost-sharing requirement. Sparks said city staff was comfortable with the proposed cost-sharing agreement. 

But city council members were divided on the cost-sharing portion of their proposed ordinance. 

Buda Mayor Todd Ruge was in favor of the cost sharing aspect, while council member Eileen Altmiller was in staunch opposition to it. 

Altmiller claimed that the developer should address traffic calming methods before a new neighborhood is even built.

“I want to make sure we prevent issues before they arise,” said Altmiller.

Council member Bobby Lane was in favor of the ordinance, echoing Altmiller’s sentiments that it would tackle traffic calming problems before they actually exist.

“This ordinance could be used as a roadmap for future developers coming to the Buda area,” Lane said.

Buda’s proposed traffic calming ordinance is slated to reappear on the August 16 city council agenda.