The city held a public hearing last week to discuss its proposed Transportation Plan, which — if passed — will be the first such plan since 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 engineering, architectural and field services consulting firm provided recommendations, many of which are included on the city’s proposed plan. At the same time, many projects included on this year’s plan were carried over from the 2010 plan — few of which show signs of happening anytime soon.
Still, a number of complaints and concerns were lodged at the public hearing last week, which took place at the Wimberley City Council meeting on Thursday, Nov. 17.
Most of the concerns centered around safety and, specifically, around many of Wimberley’s narrow country roads.
“Being on River Road, we see the traffic; we see the cars come roaring down all day and all night,” said Carol Snowden, in attendance with her husband Jim. “Sidewalks can’t be put in there — that’s just asking for fatalities to happen. It’s not uncommon to pick up car parts on the side of the road [from vehicle accidents], and it terrifies me that you’d even consider it. It’s like the city is saying it’s safe to walk on River Road, and it’s not.”
Another concern raised was the absence of a City Marshall, a position which the council delayed filling later on in the meeting.
“We don’t have anyone that acts on the city’s behalf to patrol,” resident Sarah Dishman commented.
Perhaps the most frequently raised concern was in regards to the Transportation Plan’s potential to encourage development.
“One of the last things we want to do is encourage development and further strain our water resources,” Dishman said.
“What concerns me are these new roads where basically nothing exists,” Laurie Olsen added. “These are a lot of environmentally sensitive areas, and building new roads can be damaging.”
However, the Transportation Advisory Board’s Aaron Reed said that a Transportation Plan does not hold a city to developing the areas it includes; rather, it enables the city to control whatever development tries to come into those areas — whether that is two or ten or twenty years down the road.
“Without that plan, the city doesn’t have any leverage to make developers do anything,” Reed explained. “Without a plan, the developer will build the smallest rightof- way they can; they’re not going to build a cross-section to support the amount of rooftops they’re putting in.”
Essentially, Council Member David Cohen surmised, “this is a way to make sure that if development happens, we protect Wimberley from understructure (a lack of responsible infrastructure).”
When asked about the plan earlier last week, Mayor Pro Tem. Rebecca Minnick discussed the city of Wimberley’s need for an updated plan, explaining that the plan is necessary to both fulfill Wimberley’s laws of governance and to address the traffic on Ranch Road 12.
But everything in the plan is not likely to happen soon, if at all, she conceded.
“Some of this may not be doable,” Minnick said. “The city doesn’t have jurisdiction on a lot of these, and there’s still discussion to be had. When action is going to be taken, that’s when you start to dig into each of the individual spots.”
Mayor Gina Fulkerson expressed concerns of her own.
“What if [Hays County] sees this plan and thinks that these are roads we want them to develop?” she asked. “Can we add a note explaining our intent — to prevent them from undertaking unnecessary development?”
The answer was yes, according to Reed.
“My understanding is that, in making their own Transportation Plan last year, they pretty much left a hole where Wimberley is,” he added, “to let you as a city make your own decisions.”
Hays County did, in fact, decline to include any recommended connectors within the city limits of Wimberley and Woodcreek, according to its 2021 Transportation Master Plan. The county also did not include any recommendations for future roads in the extra-territorial jurisdiction of either city, save for the beginnings of one road on the southeast side.
Reed did recommend the city have additional opportunities for public comment, allowing community members to hear about the project, ask questions and provide feedback.
The city has already scheduled another separate meeting to discuss its transportation plan on Thursday, Dec. 1. While the council may vote on the proposed plan at that meeting, the council may also choose to postpone the final vote in order to deliberate further. This meeting will also include a time for public comment.
The 35 roadway improvements suggested in this plan largely fall into the following categories: adding sidewalks, upgrading the existing roadway, constructing a roundabout, constructing a new roadway and making drainage improvements.
Adding sidewalks: 4, 8, 11, 33–35 Upgrading existing roadway: 2–3, 5–7, 13, 15–18, 21–22 Constructing a roundabout: 10, 12
Constructing a new roadway: 1, 14–15, 17–20 Making drainage improvements: 23–26, 28– 29, 31 Additional information on Wimberley’s proposed transportation plan is available at the city’s website: cityofwimberley. com.
