Wimberley council narrowly approves four‑unit short‑term rental at 202 River Road after neighbor objections

WIMBERLEY, Texas — The Wimberley City Council voted 3–2 on Oct. 16 to approve CUP25‑013, a conditional use permit to allow four short‑term rental (STR) units at 202 River Road, a 0.28‑acre R‑3‑zoned lot near downtown.

Assistant City Administrator Nathan Glazier told the council the property is vacant and the proposal calls for a two‑story building with four non‑owner‑occupied lodging units; planning and zoning had recommended approval 4–2 with a condition that the site’s one‑story cottage not be used as a rental. Glazier said the project will require septic approval from Hays County because no sewer serves the site.

Neighbors urged the council to delay action until the county signs off. Pat Remit, a local attorney and longtime resident, said the lot is “very large structure on a tiny lot” and asked the council to wait for county septic approval. Lisa Kiefer, who lives opposite the lot, said planning and zoning had not addressed traffic, sidewalks or bringing sewer across River Road and urged the council to reject approval “at this time.” Bruce Levinson and other nearby residents raised similar concerns about parking, traffic safety and the capacity of septic fields on an undersized lot.

The project’s architect, Alex Ridgeway, said the design is within setbacks, has roughly 23.3% impervious cover and is under the 35‑foot height limit; he said a septic system designed by a professional septic designer (identified in the packet as CTHC) has been prepared for submittal. Owner Lindsey Davis said the cottage on the parcel would be used as a studio (not a rental), that the suites are intended for adult couples or single adults rather than large celebration groups, and that she and her husband live nearby and would be responsive to issues.

Council members questioned whether the lot, subdivided under older rules, should be developed as STRs given downtown proximity and infrastructure limits. Several members said the area is walkable and could be a reasonable location for visitor lodging; others emphasized residents’ concerns and the narrow lot size. The council discussed whether to make approval contingent on county septic permit; staff said a conditional use permit could be drafted so it would not take effect until required permits and utility approvals are in place.

After initial procedural confusion about how many written oppositions qualified the request for a supermajority, the council rescinded an earlier motion, recalculated the count of written oppositions and reconvened. With written opposition determined to be below the 20% threshold that would require a supermajority, the final vote to approve CUP25‑013 was 3 in favor and 2 opposed.

The record shows neighbors raised septic design, parking, construction staging and potential noise from transient occupancy as the principal reasons for opposition; the applicant and architect said professional septic designs were prepared and that the design aims to limit occupancy to adult guests and weekend stays.

What happens next: the council approved the CUP as presented; staff and the applicant discussed conditioning the CUP so it could not be exercised until required county and utility permits are secured. The permit, building and septic permits must still be obtained from the appropriate agencies before the development can proceed.

— Reporting by a staff compilation of the council meeting; quotes and details drawn from the council’s Oct. 16, 2025 public hearing.