On Sept. 8, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing for the ratification of a zoning designation for 5.155 acres of property neighboring the construction site.
After over two hours of citizen comments and commission discussions, the zoning ratification was unanimously tabled for 60 days, giving additional time to review information before a recommendation is made to City Council.
Despite tabling the agenda item, city staff said Buc-ee’s can still move forward with its project, since the property in question has previously been zoned at the highest commercial zoning prior to the update of the city's Unified Development Code in 2021.
The proposed use of the property in question is for an accessory parking lot for Buc-ee’s employees.
Some context
On July 7, the Planning and Zoning Commission had a postponed agenda item for the rezoning of 3.976 acres near the Buc-ee’s site.
On Sept. 8, the agenda item was changed from a rezoning to a zoning designation ratification, and the acreage was increased to 5.155 acres, raising concern from residents and committee members.
Planning and Zoning Director Nathan Crane explained that upon adoption of the UDC, the previous commercial zoning for the property was retired and no new zoning was assigned. Since a property cannot exist without zoning, city staff submitted the ratification to zone the property as C-3—the zoning that Crane said most aligns with the previous B-2 zoning.
“This does not impact the decision on whether or not Buc-ee’s is coming,” Crane said. “It does not have any effect on site planning, on design, on lighting, on signage, or on anything like this.”
Planning and Zoning Vice Chair Lucas Hiler asked staff why the property acreage increased between the two planned public hearings.
Crane said when the property was zoned in 2020, it included the entire 5.155 acres.
“We felt like it was important since we had to fix this error that we fixed it for the entire five acres and not just the three,” Crane said.
Following resident requests, city staff put out a detailed timeline with the history of the project.
Public input
During the Sept. 8 meeting, many residents took the opportunity to voice their grievances with the store, highlighting traffic, the lack of DarkSky compliance, water usage, environmental impacts, signage and other aspects of the development.
Resident Dana Mathis said Buc-ee’s has failed to do a traffic impact analysis and needs to address resident concerns prior to moving forward with zoning or further platting.
“It has been nine years since this project was announced,” Mathis said. “A short pause to resolve these issues is not unreasonable. If we are going to do this project, then we must do it right and it must be done well.”
Resident Tanji Patton highlighted the unusual nature of the sign approval process, which allegedly went before the Sign Committee to allow a 75-foot sign rather than the 40-foot sign required by the UDC.
The sign committee is made up of the planning director, fire marshal and police chief. Patton said city documents indicate approval by the planning director at the time, but there is no record of approval from the fire marshal or police chief, and no record of the decision being presented to City Council.
“We need full transparency; all records, all emails, all correspondence,” Patton said. “We need to reexamine the legalities of the 2017 development agreement.”
While most residents who spoke were against the progress of the development until issues can be resolved, others highlighted that the purpose of the meeting was to address a zoning issue, which would not have any effect on the items brought up.
Resident Sherry Leighton said she agrees with many of the resident grievances, but the development of Buc-ee’s on I-10 will not destroy the city’s character.
“There’s really nothing [on I-10] that says this is the personality of Boerne,” she said. “I don’t see this as having a huge impact on who we are as a city or who we are as a small town or a community.”
Meeting highlights
Planning and Zoning member Susan Friar clarified that the zoning applied to the property would be attached to the property itself, and developers could use the property for any use that falls under the assigned zoning.
“We can’t guarantee after today that it is going to be a parking lot,” Friar said. “Whatever zoning we give them, they have multiple uses that can be done with it.”
Committee member Carlos Vecino said he appreciates all the resident feedback and commitment to transparency for the Buc-ee’s development, but the Planning and Zoning Commission needs to ensure it treats all applicants the same, regardless of whether it is Buc-ee’s or another developer.
“I think that is an important responsibility of this commission to treat people fairly, treat applicants fairly,” Vecino said.
City Attorney Mick McKamie said the 5-acre property would require the developer to follow current UDC ordinances, which include DarkSky compliance.
The request for the zoning reassignment was submitted by staff, but committee Chair Tim Bannwolf commented on Buc-ee’s lack of a presence at the meeting, given the community traction-building over the past few months.
“I frankly feel like Buc-ee’s has given us the middle finger tonight, and that doesn’t sit well with me,” Bannwolf said.
Bannwolf said over the last nine years, the project has morphed into something different from what was originally planned, and he believes that the project is not eligible for vested rights in 2019 due to significant project changes.
The bottom line
The zoning clarification is planned to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission again in November, giving commissioners time to review all information before making a recommendation to City Council.
Crane clarified that tabling this decision does not prohibit Buc-ee’s from moving forward since the property is still under the previous zoning rules until a new zoning is assigned.
“This action tonight–postponing–does not delay what they’re doing,” Crane said. “Permits can, if they meet all the requirements, be issued moving forward.”
