Okay, it's uh three minutes after two p.m.

on uh Wednesday, September 24th, and we'll call the planning commission meeting to order.

Will staff please do the roll call?

Commissioner De Sucke.

Present.

Commissioner Lopez.

Present.

Commissioner Ulit.

Here.

Commissioner Mylam.

Here.

Commissioner Orion.

Here.

Commissioner Bustamante.

Present.

Commissioner Siegel?

Here.

A quorum is present.

Thank you.

Can we please have information about uh Spanish interpretation services?

Thank you.

Buenas tardes.

Uh good afternoon.

See alguna persona uh necessita interpretacional español.

Favor de pasar a la carina para que se entregues su equipo.

Gracias.

Thank you.

Today we have two agendas.

Our first agenda is the combined hearing agenda.

Cases that are placed on the combined hearing agenda are cases where staff recommends approval.

The planning commission does not require further detailed discussion, and no one in the audience has signed up to speak on the item.

All cases will be read into the record for one unified motion.

At this time, um all cases on the agenda are on the combined hearing agenda except for cases not eight, nine, and ten.

Staff, did we have anything we want to say about this?

I do want to make an announcement at the top of the meeting.

Uh that sorry.

Your mic.

Can you hear me now?

Okay.

I do want to make an announcement at the top of the meeting that we are anticipating that when we reach agenda item number 10, we will be losing a quorum.

So that item will not be eligible for consideration today.

Again, agenda item number 10 is not on the consent agenda.

That would be slated for individual consideration, but we are expecting to lose a quorum.

Uh the mechanics of that are that if we are not able to consider that item because we lose a quorum, it will be automatically continued to the next meeting on October the 8th.

So just want to make that announcement at the beginning.

Thank you, Chair.

And I'd like to add that item number eight was postponed.

Thank you.

So uh once again, the combined hearing agenda will include all items except for 8, 9, and 10.

And it will include item 12, the minutes.

At this time, um, are there any commissioner questions about all the items on the consent agenda?

And if not, I'll uh hear a motion.

Move to approve the consent agenda.

Second.

Let the record show that Commissioner Bustamante has left the meeting for purposes of recusal.

Uh it is 2.06 p.m.

We have a motion by Commissioner Mylam and a second by Commissioner Orion.

Staff, will you take a vote, please?

Commissioner Mylam?

Yes.

Commissioner Orion.

Yes.

Commissioner DeSucci?

Yes.

Commissioner Lopez.

Yes.

Commissioner Ulit.

Yes.

Commissioner Siegel?

Yes.

Motion passes for approval.

As item eight is postponed, we will now hear item number nine.

I'd like to add to the record it is 207, and Commissioner Bustamante has rejoined the meeting.

Thank you.

Well, good afternoon, everybody.

Item number nine is a request for approval of a resolution to amend the Camp Bullis Extra Territorial Jurisdiction, Military Protection, Area Land Use Plan.

From low density residential to community commercial located at 8860 Cross Mound Trail.

There are 15 notices mailed, seven in favor, three opposed within two hundred feet, outside the two hundred feet, seventy-three opposed with one in support.

The applicant seeks a plan amendment to community commercial to allow for an outdoor event venue.

The proposed community commercial is not compatible with other land uses in the area.

Community commercials intended to be located in proximity to major intersections and along existing commercial corridors.

The property is located along cross mound trail, a local road, and is adjacent to and within exclusively residential areas.

While the event venue itself could be compatible with the existing neighborhood, is the other uses that are allowed in community commercial that would be detrimental to the existing character of the neighborhood with no way to limit the specific use through zoning.

Staff recommends denial the request.

JBSA didn't have any um objections to the request and sent their standard notes.

Um was continued to today.

The applicant is seeking another continuance to October 8th to allow for more time to talk to the community, and they are here as well.

Thank you, Clayton.

Uh, can we have the applicant's presentation?

He turned it off.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

Emily Weisler with Kellen Griffin and Ferramend.

Um, I would like to reserve my time.

I don't want to get into my full presentation at this time, but I'm happy to do so.

Happy to answer questions.

As Clayton stated, we are requesting a two-week continuance.

Um it has always been our goal, um, and we have done a lot of effort on outreach to the community and specifically to the Cross Mountain Ranch HOA board.

Um, we have finally gotten some traction.

Um we understand that they have also engaged with the Kaufman group and and Sydney's here as well.

Um, and so we would respectfully request some additional time now that we have some traction to continue those conversations to really sit down together um and address those concerns that have been raised by the community.

Um that has been our goal this whole time, and we would like to maintain that.

So we respectfully request an additional two weeks um to bring this back on October 8th.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, so uh we have several people signed up to speak for item number nine.

I believe we have seven speakers signed up to speak on item number nine.

Um given that the applicant is uh requesting a continuance.

Um we have not yet considered whether to grant that continuance.

Do any of the people signed up to speak for number nine want to speak now, or would you rather wait and speak at a fur at the October 8th meeting?

Speak now.

I'll speak now.

All right, that being the case.

I'll first call um George Richmond to speak.

And um you'll have three minutes.

Before my three minutes start, I uh you know I haven't talked with the speech or naming.

George Richmond, 22830, Central Prairie.

Uh I was unaware of the continuance aspects.

I may not may or may not be able to be here next time, so I'll at least like to get this on the record.

Okay.

Uh my name is George Richmond.

I've lived in Cross Mountain uh for over 37 years.

I will not repeat in detail my last discussion with this group as it's on record for your review uh regarding number one water well issues, the drought that we're in, drying up of wells in our neighborhood, and future water consumption for a business in our area.

Number two, their location is one of the most dangerous curves in the neighborhood with recent two wrecks within a point one to point two five mile uh of the entrance.

Number three, the city and or county identifying cross mountain trail as a no-through traffic zone due to risk and already high volume.

I have I have the following comments and questions that I would appreciate a response to after I'm finished.

The event location uh is currently actively doing business despite restrictions in zoning.

This happened on or about 911.

Is this not illegal?

Are they being fined?

Number two, the working website for the venue in question, as of yesterday and previous, called venue 88, states quote, an 11-acre oasis nestled in Cross Mountain Ranch, end quote.

They are advertising 11 acres in Cross Mountain Ranch, so that would violate the HOA.

Regardless of potential advertising issue, they're using their home for some services not found.

Uh are they using their home for some services not found on the uh eight acres, such as sewage and water well?

Can they legally share services from a home in the HOA with the eight acres uh venue under a different zoning?

A representative at the last meeting, if I understood her statement correctly, stated that the home was on lot eight.

Uh based on tax rules and my knowledge of the area, that is not true.

The address of the property with the home mentioned above is 8860 Cross Mountain Trail.

The two gates to enter the 2.1 acre property are actually on Adams Crossing.

The home is listed on Cross Mountain Ranch map as lot one.

It is owned by Mary Blanca Zayas.

The parties involved are using the same address for this rezoning as a property owned by Genevieve and Ramon Zias.

If this is a legally separate property, why is the address the same?

What is supposedly physically separate?

I understand it may be a mailing address issue, but if there is a specific, but if it is a specific different property, why are we fighting rezoning for this same address?

I would appreciate answers to the legality of actively using the venue currently, and can they share services like water and septic from the home in Cross Mountain with eight acre venue?

Uh staff uh is are we able to address any of those questions?

I I can address some.

We'll probably take a look at the outside of the meeting.

I I will just say on the address question so we advertise a legal description of the property and if addresses aren't actively assigned we will use a nearby address so that people are aware of the general vicinity but the legal description is what is legally tied to the request for for the plan amendment in this case and then we can get with you on your other questions.

Thank you.

The next attendant attendee signed up to speak is Sid Wolf.

I'll remove my time commissioner next we have uh Rafael Goyo thank you.

My name's Rafael Goico I live in 9219 Pact Train Pass in Cross Mountain Trail or Cross Mountain Ranch.

Been there for about 25 years and I oppose the uh the rezoning request this property has been used somewhat recently as an event venue in noncompliance with COSA and Bear County requirements.

The existence of this venue in our neighborhood is concerning for many reasons.

First of all if you haven't driven the area I would highly recommend you take a short drive outside San Antonio and go check it out.

Here you're gonna find a gem of a neighborhood it's in the midst of a quickly growing San Antonio Burning corridor we live on large lots with modestly sized homes we're surrounded by dense live oak and ash juniper it's on the very edge of the Texas Hill country and it's stunning.

The main artery through this neighborhood is Cross Mountain Trail.

It meanders for about two miles you'll see deer hogs all kinds of wildlife you'll also see mailboxes destroyed from cars that speed through the neighborhood in fact just recently a semi lost control and damaged property on this trail to minimize the traffic on this trail excuse me the county has recently made some changes less than a handful of years ago they installed radar controlled um speed limit devices on the uh on the road um there are two pretty new stop signs to slow down traffic on cross mountain trail and not too long ago the county posted no through trucks on the uh street at both entrances due to the amount of truck traffic and all the construction going on that was recently changed to no through traffic so there's obviously a problem that Bear County is noticing and are trying to limit traffic here will rezoning 8860 cross mountain trail impact traffic even more you know to be honest the venue doesn't worry me as much as the potential impact of a new tenant or owner of the property um in fact uh Clayton Wallace said that due to the uh rezoning it could be used for much higher impact uses like a lube and tire shop in the middle of my neighborhood a liquor store large scale retail a restaurant a gas station even a self-storage facility aside from the traffic impact uh this business type would cause severe visual blight and noise pollution in this beautiful oasis of Bear County if you want to talk about an oasis it's the neighborhood but probably more egregious than the traffic is the direct impact on the cross mountain and springs neighborhood that are adjacent and abut the neighborhood as uh Georgia said earlier um I am concerned that a rezoning sign has not been placed in front of the property to notify the people that live there um but uh recently I posted this information on next door it's gotten well over a thousand views so there are people that are very interested in what's going on here with the explosion of new residential communities and businesses popping up in the area we're asking you to protect this amazing hill country neighborhood with vigor in order to preserve its beauty thank you so much uh the next person who signed up to speak on item nine is Alan Hibbard I'd like to delay until we got next we have Mary Massey and I'd like to delay as well next is uh I believe it's Natalie Mather Natalie Natalie Nathan that could be it I'm sorry a mistake okay okay my name is Natalie Nathan I reside at um 23225 Eagle Gap in Cross Mountain Ranch I appreciate the previous um comments which I had in my notes as well in terms of safety in our neighborhood the beautiful pristine landscaping so I won't um won't take up my time elaborating on those however in terms of the safety I don't know that anyone knows that there were there are two school crossing signs that are um posted on both sides

I appreciate the previous um comments, which I had in my notes as well in terms of safety in our neighborhood, the beautiful, pristine landscaping.

So I won't um take up my time elaborating on those.

However, in terms of the safety, I don't know that anyone knows that there were there are two school crossing signs that are um posted on both sides, um, both directions of Cross Mountain Trail.

Find that curious that a business such as this could operate with possible children crossing, not to mention we talked about the animals.

We have animal crossing signs.

We have no lighting on our roads.

We have deer crossing, hogs crossing, animals at night and without any lighting.

That's also major concern.

Um we talked about the well issues, just a personal experience with the wells.

Um because of the drought, my wall company that services my well said that if my well dries up, it will be 75,000.

So there has been a huge issue in our neighborhood about concerning water.

I really don't understand how any type of commercial business could assist when we're all using the same aquifer.

We don't have access to saws.

We do not have city water.

Our water is responsible it's our responsibility, and wells have dried up, and that's on the homeowners.

Speaking of which, our properties.

I've had people come to my house and say, my mom, my family, they live in Colorado.

This reminds me of Colorado.

The hills, the trees, the animals, the nature, which is one of the reasons that we all live there.

So we all worked hard to buy homes and properties there.

And another concern is about the devaluation of our properties.

If we have some type of commercial zoning, what is that gonna do to the um value of our properties?

Not to mention, if this gets approved, where does it stop?

I have five garages.

I could I not come back here and say I want to set up a Jiffy loop or I want to set up some kind of a um some kind of a car repair shop.

And if this is approved, how are you gonna tell me no?

I don't understand.

It doesn't really make sense.

There are no other businesses in Cross Mountain Ranch that operate to this type of extent.

National advertising, the knot for weddings is not just weddings, it's corporate events, it's glamping and security.

You've got hundreds and now maybe thousands of people that are coming through our traipcing through our neighborhood.

Thank you, Miss Nathan.

Okay, thanks.

Next we have signed up signed up to speak, Joaquin Mira.

Thank you.

My name is Joaquin Mira.

I live in 226 to 60 range in uh Cross Mountain Ranch.

Uh I an immigrant as they call it.

I wouldn't say doctor, not doing too bad.

But uh we chose uh Cross Mountain Ranch because of the spoken before.

Huge lots could really are so big you could put any kind of business that you want to put, but it would destroy the property because the code we like is precisely the opposite.

We like the like traffic, like of noise, uh night lights that you can see the stars, things like that.

So as an owner, same thing.

I I put a lot of money in my new home.

I think in it will increase in volume, and it has increasing value quite a bit because of the location.

With something like that, it would destroy not only my property, almost any single cross mountain right.

So why do you want to have something unique?

Which is difficult to find why I understand people want to make money, and the people have the property to do that, but uh they could consider that there are other areas outside cross-mountain rights to do that.

Plenty of opportunities why to do something, which is going to destroy a bunch of homes on the hopes and the people improving what they have and enjoying what we already have.

Thank you.

All right, that is the last um attendee that we had signed up to speak on item number nine.

Before we begin, Commissioner questions, I want to offer the applicant the opportunity to respond to that if uh you if you would like.

Um I yes, um, and I really do appreciate everyone coming out.

Um and um we tried to get the word out to everyone that we could that we had already requested um put in the request to delay today um and respectfully um really just looking forward to the opportunity, hopefully finally um to have those real conversations we have been trying for weeks, um months, um, and um uh done a lot of work over the last month since the last continuance um to try and get some sort of response and some sort of communication going, and I think that we finally broken through on that.

And so um really do appreciate everyone coming out today.

We really look forward to the opportunity to address all of those concerns.

Um we have some really good ideas and and grateful that um I think that they are going to be working with the Kaufman group on this.

I think that will be really helpful.

Um, but respectfully do request the continuance today so we can really have those conversations um that we have been so desperately trying to have for a long time.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I'll begin with Commissioner questions to my left.

Commissioner Busamante?

Yeah, briefly, just I'm sorry, I'm used to having one that I can just hit the button.

Um briefly, staff again, this is ETJ, correct?

Which means that zoning does not hear this, correct?

Correct.

All right.

Which means that we can't limit through zoning the uses that are at play here.

It is simply a land use request.

Correct.

So any of the uses allowed by uh community commercial would be allowed by right, essentially.

And although it is beyond our purview, uh the individuals for the applicant and the individuals for the homeowners association can reach basically side agreements, restrictive covenants to address concerns regarding use.

Correct.

All right, thank you.

Just to end up with the they certainly can, but the city would not be a party to the enforcement of those private restrictions.

Correct.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Spiel.

And thank you, Mr.

Wallace.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Lopez.

No questions.

Okay, I I have a question, and this is what I'm expecting to hear at the next when this gets continued, is that uh when I saw this uh originally conveyed by the declarant, because I did some research on this uh due to just all the people who were seemed to be who were concerned about it.

So in 1988, when this deed was conveyed, they wanted they put a restricted covenant for them to comply with the Cross Mountain uh DCCRs.

And uh and then it was removed in 2013, which I thought was very strange, 25 years later.

And what I like to know is one uh, you know, when he was a declarant when when it was originally conveyed uh by Adams, uh he was speaking on behalf of the developer, but in 2013 had he had he already turned it over to the to the neighborhood, and therefore wouldn't the the ownership of those restrictions lie with the neighborhood and not the declarant anymore.

So I'd like to know is this or is this not subject to the cross mountain unit one uh restrictive covenant?

Uh that's what I'm looking to hear some from somebody uh from whomever um now or when this gets continued, because I think that I've never seen that before.

It's very odd.

But thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Roulette.

Oh, please, please come forward.

Again, and super happy to get into all of that um if we can also be um continued to the eighth, because we do need some more time to address um some other items.

But um to my understanding, so when this property lot eight.

Lot eight was originally platted.

Um it was part of a a plot and a replot.

Um so replotting, some areas were replotted into unit one A.

This was never platted.

Lot eight was then at that time on that same plat, originally platted.

Prior to that, it was never platted, it was never plotted as part of Cross Mountain Ranch.

Um, our understanding, my understanding is that that original reference to inclusion was a mistake, and that's why it was since retracted.

Um it was never plotted as part of Cross Mountain Ranch.

It was never plotted as units one through four.

It is not subject to those restrictions.

Um, and so it is it is not subject to those, and that's why that was corrected later on.

I can't speak to the time frame for correction, but that is that is why it was never part of it.

This lot specifically, lot eight.

Because what I from what I understood and what I how I read it is that when this when the declarant uh deeded this over as acreage and not as a plated lot, he put in the deed.

By the way, you are going to comply with the unit one restrictions because it does lie, it's this little pocket that lies in the neighborhood.

And I thought that it seemed like that was his intent.

Uh and then 25 years later, when they when he took it out, my concern is whether it was an error or not, the moment it was conveyed in 1988, him being the declarant, I'm talking about Adams.

Did that when he when did he stop being the developer?

Because if he turned this over to the neighborhood, aren't they the beneficiary of that restriction?

And did he have the ability to remove it in 2013?

That you know that's what I'm trying to find out.

Sure.

Um, and and we can happily get you all of that information ahead of the meeting on the 8th.

I can I can walk you through that with with all the documentation.

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry, public comment period for this item is over.

The applicant can speak beyond the three-minute public comment.

Okay, now Commissioner.

No questions at this time.

Commissioner Mylon No questions but a comment, like Commissioner Bostamente said this is an odd one because it feels like it really is out of our purview.

Um read is none of our business.

Um it's it's difficult because I understand, you know, I understand wanting to keep your home as beautiful and as fabulous as it was.

And I also understand wanting to pursue that American dream to be able to create something new and different.

So I just want to say it's a really difficult situation for us to face, being that all of those things are true that it's really not particularly in our purview.

So I will support a continuance and hope that you can work it out.

Thank you.

Commissioner Disuki.

No question today, uh, thank you.

I have no questions either.

Um having heard all of those Commissioner questions.

If there are no other uh points of discussion, then I'll accept a motion.

I move to continue this item to October 8th.

Second.

I have a motion for continuance to October 8th by Commissioner Bustamante and a second by Commissioner Mylam.

Staff, will you call the vote, please?

Commissioner Bustamante.

Commissioner Mylam?

Yes.

Commissioner DeSucci?

Yes.

Commissioner Lopez.

Yes.

Commissioner Ulit.

Yes.

Commissioner Orion.

Yes.

Commissioner Siegel?

Yes.

Motion passes for continuance.

All right, thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for coming out today.

I want to say to the entire crowd here, it's really impressive that all of you gave your time, have given your time to come and speak about something that is of interest to you and that you feel passionately about.

And um and we've heard you that those of the of you that have spoken so far.

So thank you for coming out today.

Uh the last item on the agenda will necessarily end the meeting because we will lose quorum as soon as I call that item.

So I especially want to encourage those who came to speak on item number 10 to please return to the next meeting on October 8th, if possible, so that um so that your voices can be heard at that time.

Steph, is there any way that we can hear any of these people without calling the item to motion?

We would have to have a quorum to entertain public comment.

Okay, so we are unable to hear your voices today in front of this body, and that is regrettable.

Um, but it's necessary.

And so thank you for coming out today.

I very much appreciate it, and I hope to see you again next week.

We will be here on the October 8th.

Well, you can speak to staff about it.

Staff will stick around to answer questions if if we can just get the recusal uh read in for the item.

All right.

Do you want me to call item 10 and then recuse Commissioner Siegel?

All right.

Uh item 10 is the next item on the agenda.

There is a recusal by uh Commissioner Siegel.

She is now going to leave the hearing room.

And I would uh read in that uh the time is two thirty three, and the meeting is hereby concluded for loss of a quorum.

Thank you.

Thank you.