Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cibolo hearing on rezoning Dobie Boulevard parcel draws dozens in support of Burn Boot Camp

2802734 · March 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City Council held a lengthy public hearing on a rezoning request for a 5.205‑acre parcel south of the West Borgfeld/Dobie Boulevard intersection so Burn Boot Camp Cibolo Creek can relocate and create a wellness/fitness complex. Council did not vote; the ordinance is tentatively scheduled for April 8.

The Cibolo City Council on March 25 held a lengthy public hearing on a rezoning request for a roughly 5.205‑acre parcel on Dobie Boulevard so Burn Boot Camp Cibolo Creek and an associated “wellness collective” can relocate. City planner Mr. Spencer said the owners are Sam D Management LLC and the applicants’ representatives are Alex and Tisha Hartman; the applicants seek rezoning from SF‑2 (low‑density single‑family) to C‑2‑R (community retail/service, restrictive alcohol sales) to allow a 12,000–15,000 square‑foot building with roughly 8,000 square feet planned for a gym and the remainder for multi‑tenant office and business uses.

The rezoning drew more than two dozen people who spoke in favor at City Hall plus 24 emailed comments read into the record by City Secretary Valerie. Dozens of residents and members of Burn Boot Camp described the gym as a community resource that includes child watch and programs for families, military and first responders. Tammy Boyd, lead trainer at Burn Boot Camp Cibolo Creek, told council the franchise emphasizes “people first,” described cases where members rallied for one another after illness or tragedy, and urged approval so members would stop driving outside the city for a permanent facility. Owner Alex Hartman said easements and wooded buffers on the property limit where structures can be built, that the property is difficult to market for single‑family development, and that the Hartmans plan a public trail in the wooded easement and would avoid alcohol‑related businesses under the C‑2‑R designation.

Planner Mr. Spencer told council the Planning & Zoning Commission voted 4–3 at its March 12 meeting to recommend a modification of the applicant’s original request (the commission had proposed C‑1 with a conditional‑use permit to allow a fitness studio). In response to commission concerns about traffic, noise and the broader range of uses allowed by a full C‑2 district, the applicants amended their request to the C‑2‑R designation, which staff said would prohibit alcohol‑related uses such as bars and liquor stores while permitting the intended fitness and office uses by right. Staff reported that mailed notice went to 18 property owners within 200 feet and that the city had received 2 emails in favor and 2 in opposition as of the hearing.

Speakers stressed traffic and safety were manageable or could be mitigated; several speakers said camp times could be adjusted to avoid school dismissal peaks. The Hartmans said they had met with nearby residents, shared plans and left contact information. Multiple attendees described Burn Boot Camp’s child‑watch program and community events; many written emails submitted by members told similar stories of health benefits, child care and neighborhood engagement.

Council did not vote on the rezoning request at the March 25 meeting. Mr. Spencer said the ordinance is tentatively scheduled for Council consideration and possible approval or disapproval at the April 8 meeting. Council members and staff also directed the developer and applicants to participate in follow‑up sessions and to return for the vote with any revisions or clarified mitigation measures.

Why it matters: Rezoning from residential to commercial for this parcel would allow a forward‑facing neighborhood business that the applicants say would provide local jobs, child care during classes and an expanded fitness option, while opponents have flagged potential traffic and land‑use impacts. The applicant amended the request after the Planning & Zoning Commission sought a narrower set of allowed uses.

Upcoming steps: Council will take final action at a later meeting (tentatively April 8); staff and the applicants will continue outreach and provide any requested traffic or site design information to Council ahead of the vote.