After a series of meetings and sessions of public comment, the city of Wimberley has voted to officially approve its 2022 Transportation Master Plan, including 32 of the plan’s 35 project proposals. This is the first such plan to be passed since the prior transportation plan was established in 2010.
Earlier this year, Wimberley city officials and staff engaged transportation consultants with CP&Y Inc. to study roadway safety, traffic flow, roads and pedestrian issues throughout the city limits. The firm provided a number of recommendations, many of which were included on the city’s proposed plan. Many projects included on this year’s plan were also carried over from the previous plan — much to some residents’ chagrin.
Wimberley residents at the Nov. 17 and Dec. 1 sessions of public comment emphasized the importance of re-evaluating all aspects of the proposed plan, cautioning against including any one project simply because it had been included a decade ago.
“I’ve heard two reasons for including these roads on the map: one was that they’ve been there since 2010, and the other was that they would deter development,” local Heather Carter said. “[Project] 14 was on the map, and yet, in 2018, they built a subdivision there, and the deed says they can’t subdivide. That subdivision takes up over half of that road.”
Last week, the Wimberley Valley Watershed Association released a statement directed to the Wimberley City Council, highlighting its additional, environmental concerns about the city’s proposed transportation plan.
“We have heard you clearly grapple with the balance between traffic congestion and watershed protection and between water quality, road construction, and development concerns,” the association stated. “The 2022 Transportation Master Plan includes several unnecessary legacy projects as holdovers from a 2010 transportation plan. New roads through undeveloped areas will attract new development that is unsupportable with available groundwater resources and would impact groundwater availability for environmental features and existing development.”
The statement identified Project ID numbers 14 (River Road Extension), 15 (Carney Lane So. Extension), 19, 20 and 21 (Fulton Ranch Rd.) as “contrary to the current need and awareness for conservation development that protects critical recharge areas and sensitive riparian zones to protect water supplies, preserve endangered species habitat and reduce flood risk for our community.” The association reasoned these projects were unnecessary or provided “minimal benefit.”
In response to this statement, Mayor Pro Tem Rebecca Minnick proposed a compromise: that the council remove projects 14, 15, 19 and 20 from its transportation plan and approve the remaining projects, returning to possibly amend the plan in a year’s time.
“There are components that are problematic, but I think we need to pass a plan tonight,” she said. “We should revisit the plan in a year with a good stakeholder strategy.”
Councilmember David Cohen suggested an alternative: remove only projects, 14, 19 and 20. The vote passed unanimously.
