[00:00:01]
[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER]
MEETING TO ORDER AT 1201 ON, OH MY GOSH, JULY 17TH, 17TH, 17TH, 24.IN ATTENDANCE, IT'S MICHELLE TOWNSEND, JAMIE SCHWARTZ SHAW, GARY DICKEY, AND MYSELF, DANIELLE GRAHAM.
UM, ABSENT BLAINE SMITH, ELLEN AB AND MINDY BIRCH.
UM, CAN I GET A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MAY 22ND, 20, 24 MINUTES FOR THE BOA MEETING? SO MOVE SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
[PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS]
WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION ITEM TODAY.UM, THE, IT'S TO CONDUCT A HEARING, DISCUSSION AND TAKE POSSIBLE ACTION ON PREVIOUSLY PLATTED APPROXIMATE 70 FOOT DEEP LOTS, REDUCING THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FOOT TO APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FOOT BY A VARIANCE REQUEST OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON CODE OF ORDINANCES.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TWO 11.008 AND VARIANCE TO SECTION 28 DASH 50 SFA SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TOWN HOMES, D AREA REGULATIONS, TWO SIZE OF YARDS, A MINIMUM FRONT YARD, 15 FEET FRONT YARD SETBACKS SHALL BE STAGGERED IN AT LEAST FOUR FOOT INCREMENTS, SUCH THAT NO MORE THAN TWO UNITS HAVE THE SAME FRONT SETBACK IN A ROW.
NO FRONT ENG ENTRY GARAGES PERMITTED UNLESS THE GARAGE DOOR OR CARPORT ACCESS OPENING IS SET BACK AT LEAST 20 FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, SUCH AS THE RIGHT OF WAY OR STREET EASEMENT LINE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON DENNIS AVENUE, ALSO KNOWN AS BRUSHY BAYOU TOWN HOMES, SECTION TWO LOTS, 13 14 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, AND 23 TSE SURVEY ABSTRACT THREE 18, BRAZORIA COUNTY, TEXAS END ZONE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED SFA DISTRICT.
UM, THIS MEETING IS CON, REMAINED OPEN FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
UM, I BELIEVE WE WILL HEAR FROM STAFFS FIRST.
UM, AS YOU ALL RE REMEMBER, THIS PARTICULAR HEARING, UM, DID OCCUR PREVIOUSLY BACK IN, UM, MAY, MAY 22ND, IN WHICH WE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND THE APPLICANT REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL ON DENNIS AVENUE.
UM, PROPERTY LOCATED OF COURSE ON DENNIS.
UM, THESE PARTICULAR TOWN HOMES, AS YOU KNOW, WERE PART OF A PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON DENNIS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD.
SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD HAD VARIOUS, UM, CONSTRAINTS REGARDING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS THAT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
UM, SO IT RENDERED MOST OF THOSE LOTS UNBUILDABLE, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION MAYBE, UM, THE FIRST TWO LOTS, WHICH COULD BE CONSOLIDATED FOR THE PURPOSES OF A DUPLEX THAT FEELS PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT, UM, WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER ON THE NORTH SIDE COULD BE ENTERTAINED THERE.
BUT OTHERWISE THE OTHER LOTS, UM, ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE, UM, WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY TYPE OF BUILDING PERMITS.
AND THAT WOULD, UM, COVER LOTS 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, AND 30.
UM, STAFF WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT THOSE FOLLOW THE, UM, CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD REGARDING IT EITHER BE, UM, DEDICATED TO CITY FOR PARK LAND PURPOSES OR CONSOLIDATED FOR THE PURPOSES OF ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR THE RESIDENTS WOULD BE THE, THE BACKUP OPTION IN CASE THE CITY DID NOT ACCEPT.
UM, THOSE WERE THE CONVERSATIONS I THINK STAFF BROUGHT BEFORE YOU.
UM, THE AREA IN THE BLACK IS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY.
UM, THE AREA ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD, IF IT WERE COMPLETED AS PLANNED ORIGINALLY WOULD ALLOW THIS DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP THE TOWN HOMES ON THE SIDE, I'M SORRY, ON THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH THE, UM, VARIANCE THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING TODAY TO ALLOW THE BUILDING TO BE NO CLOSER TO THE ROAD THAN THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND GARAGES.
AND, UM, HE WOULD OF COURSE SATISFY ANY REAR YARD CONSTRAINTS OR SIDE YARD CONSTRAINTS ACCORDING TO THE CODE.
THE ONLY OTHER CAVEAT WOULD BE THE EASEMENT THAT IS LOCATED, UM, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE WATER EASEMENT, UM, BETWEEN LOTS 18 AND 19, IN WHICH WE'VE GOTTEN CONFIRMATION FROM OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THAT THAT'S JUST A DUPLICATION WATERLINE THAT COULD BE REMOVED AND THAT EASEMENT COULD BE ABANDONED THROUGH THE PLAING PROCESS
[00:05:01]
OR SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.UM, STAFF CONCURS WITH THAT AND THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR, UM, THAT RESERVATION ON THE NORTH SIDE THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR PARKLAND TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE SOUTH SIDE.
AND THEN, UM, THE COMPLETION OF THE TOWN HOMES COULD OCCUR ON THE NORTH SIDE.
SO THOSE WERE THE CAVEATS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE LAST MEETING, AND WE, UM, CONTINUED THE HEARING BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAD NOT SUBMITTED THE, UM, AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP CONSENT ON THE, UM, APPLICATION BECAUSE HE HAD NOT PUT THE EARNEST MONEY ON THE PROPERTY.
SO SINCE THAT TIME, ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF.
UM, SO WE WERE ABLE TO ALLOW YOU TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS REQUEST.
THAT'S BASICALLY THE SUMMARY YOU WERE PROVIDED THE MINUTES, WHICH CAPITALIZES SOME OF THAT CONVERSATION AS WELL.
UM, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF, WE'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THAT.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES AGAIN OF THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC HEARING TO EVERYONE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY, AND WE DID NOTIFY THE APPLICANT OF THE MEETING AS WELL.
UH, UNDER ITEM TWO, PAGE NINE,
AND I WAS, AND IT'S PROBABLY ME NOT UNDERSTANDING, BUT HE'S PROPOSING TO DONATE 24 THROUGH 30 IS HOW IT READS IN EXCHANGE FOR 25.
THAT'S WITHIN THAT NUMBER RANGE.
SO ON THE NORTH SIDE, AS I WAS UM, SUMMARIZING, UM, IF YOU COULD FIND, ROLL BACK UP TO THE, THE LOTS THAT ARE KIND OF DELINEATED, UM, OTHER WAY I THINK, YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 11 MM-HMM.
LOT 20 WAS ORIGINALLY SEE THAT LOT, THE LAST LOT ON THE RIGHT.
IT, IT WAS RESERVED FOR PARKLAND.
SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS ALL OF THE PARKLAND USE WOULD BE TRANSFERRED TO ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
AND WE WOULD, UM, UTILIZE ALL OF THE LOTS ON THE NORTH SIDE FOR TOWN HOMES.
SO WOULD IT BE THAT'S WHAT THAT'S EXPLAINED.
IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER, RIGHT? WOULDN'T IT BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER? WOULDN'T HE BE DONATING 24 THROUGH 30 IN EXCHANGE FOR 20? I WOULD JUST SAY HE'S DONATING THE 24 THROUGH THE 30TH.
AND I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT UHHUH LAND WE WERE ACTUALLY TO KEEP IT CLEAR.
LET'S JUST SAY HE'S, HE'S DEDICATE, HE'S OFFERING TO DEDICATE THE, UM, WE'RE GONNA SAY 23 THROUGH 30.
DEDICATE THOSE, HE OFFERING TO DEDICATE 23 THROUGH 30 IN EXCHANGE FOR BEING ABLE TO BUILD, TO BUILD THE TOWN HOME 20, TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT TO, TO COMPLETE THAT SIDE OF THE STREET TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
HE'S WILLING TO, BECAUSE HE, THERE'S NO REALLY NEED FOR HIM TO, TO UTILIZE IT.
SO HE WOULD RATHER DEDICATE IT FOR PARKLAND USE.
AND UM, THE RESERVES ON THE NORTH SIDE THAT I DISCUSSED MM-HMM.
SO WHEN THAT CONVERSATION, BUT THE CITY ENGINEER IS CONFIDENT THAT THAT'S, WE WOULD PRESENT THAT THROUGH COUNCIL ACTION AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO BOTH DEDICATION OF LAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND ACCEPTING IT AND THEN, UM, ABANDONMENT OF THE WATER EASEMENT AS WELL AS ABANDONMENT OF THE RESERVE FOR THE PARK.
SO WHATEVER YOU DO, IF YOU DECIDE TO ALLOW HIM THAT SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE OR SEVEN FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, YOUR CONDITION AS WE KIND OF OUTLINED IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH IN THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD COVER THE NECESSARY REPLANTING THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR, THE, UM, ABANDONMENT OF THE EASEMENT AND THEN THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PARKLAND.
AND THEN AFTER SAY IF WE APPROVE ALL THAT, THEN IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL, UM, IT'S NOT ACTING ON THE VARIANCE, BUT THEY WOULD ACT ON WHETHER OR NOT TO ACCEPT THE, UM, PARKLAND DEDICATION AND WHETHER OR NOT TO, UM, ABANDON THOSE EASEMENTS IF THEY DECIDE NOT TO DO EITHER OR HE WOULD STILL FROM YOUR ACTION, BE ABLE TO DO THE TOWN HOMES ONLY UP TO LOT 18.
UM, AND THEN HE WOULD RETAIN THE EASEMENT AND THE RECREATIONAL, UM, RESERVE.
YOUR ACTION IS PARTICULARLY AND SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOWING THE SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE ALLOWANCE ON THAT FRONT YARD.
CAN I ASK JUST ONE MORE QUESTION? SURE.
UH, IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS, I'VE NEVER, I'M RELATIVELY NEW TO THE BOARD, SO I'VE NEVER ENCOUNTERED LIKE KIND OF THE LAND SWAP SITUATION.
[00:10:02]
THE, THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES THAT WE GET PER UNIT OF CONSTRUCTION ON NEW CONSTRUCTION DO, WOULD WE STILL GET THOSE? YES.EVEN IN THE SWAP, JUST BECAUSE IT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, BECAUSE HE'S NEW CONSTRUCTION, HE WILL ABIDE BY THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
CHANCES ARE HE PROBABLY WOULD WANT TO DO, UM, PARK LAND IN LIEU OF CONTRIBUTION BECAUSE THE ACREAGE IN WHICH HE'S, UM, DEDICATING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD PROBABLY IS NOT FIVE ACRES OR WHATEVER THEIR MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IS.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME AMENITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED WHEN YOU DONATE A PARK.
SO HE PROBABLY WON'T GET CREDITS FOR DONATING THAT LAND.
AND THAT'S ALSO NOT IN FRONT OF US TODAY.
THAT WAS JUST NO, THAT WOULD BE PER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
THAT'LL BE CALCULATED THROUGH THE PARKS DIRECTOR AND CHANCES ARE HE'LL BE PAYING THAT CONTRIBUTION PER, PER DOORS THAT HE'S ADDING.
ON PREVIOUSLY PLATTED AND THE NEW LOG.
'CAUSE WE'RE, WE'LL TREAT THIS LIKE NEW FOR HIM.
AND SO HE'LL BE ON, HE'LL BE UNDER THE NEW PARK LAND REQUIREMENTS.
FOR LOT 20 IS THE ONE THAT WAS, OR THAT CURRENTLY IS, BUT HE'S WANTING TO SWITCH.
IT SAYS RESERVED FOR PARKLAND, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, SOMEHOW SOMEBODY THOUGHT HE WAS GOING, THEY WERE GONNA BE ABLE TO PUT UNITS ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND THEY FELT THAT HEY, WE'LL JUST PUT THIS LITTLE POCKET AT THE END OF THE SUBDIVISION.
BUT UNDER THIS CURRENT DESIGN, THE LOGIC OF IT IS KIND OF CHANGING AND RIGHT.
WE'RE KIND OF CONSIDERING MAYBE OPEN SPACE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, COMMON AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
IF THE CITY DOESN'T ACCEPT THAT HE'S AGREED THAT HE WILL OWN IT, MAINTAIN IT.
WELL, AND MY QUESTION IS, WHEN IT SAYS RESERVED FOR PARK, DOES THAT MEAN THAT SOMEBODY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD A PARK ON IT? I'M ASSUMING THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENED YEARS AGO? YEAH.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE OF CREATING THOSE NARROW LOTS AND YEAH.
BUT SOMEONE ELSE HAD A DIFFERENT, I THINK PLAN OF ACTION AND JUST WHERE I'M GOING IS, IS IT SAYS IT'S RESERVED FOR PARK AND NOW WE'RE GONNA SAY IT'S NOT.
WELL YOU'RE NOT TAKING ACTION ON THAT.
RIGHT NOW YOUR CONDITION IS THAT THAT ACTION HAS TO OCCUR AT THE COUNCIL TO ABANDON THAT RES RESERVE AND TO ACCEPT THE OTHER, UM, PARKLAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO THIS EXCHANGE IS THE EXCHANGE FOR LOT 20 IN EXCHANGE FOR LOTS 23 THROUGH 30.
WHAT? IT HAPPENS WITH LOTS 21 AND 22 ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
HE WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD A DUPLEX ON THERE.
AND DO WE HAVE TO DO, THAT'S AN ACTION, THAT'S A PART OF YOUR ACTION.
YOU COULD BE AWARE, SAY, HEY, I WANT TO KEEP 21 THROUGH 30 AS PARKLAND AND NOT ALLOW HIM TO DO 21 AND 22.
UM, STAFF FEELS THERE IS SOME LEGITIMACY THERE WHERE HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO PUT A, A, A DUPLEX ON THAT PROPERTY.
UM, SO YOUR ACTION WOULD BE, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD FOR THE VARIANCE AND ALSO ON THE SOUTH SIDE FOR 21 AND 22, POSSIBLY AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE IS, UM, A PART OF DEDICATED OPEN SPACE AND THEN THE LAND THAT NEEDS TO BE, UM, COMPLETED THROUGH THE PLATING PROCESS AND EASEMENT ABANDONMENTS.
SO IN THE, UM, RECOMMENDED I GUESS ACTION OR MOTION, UH, WE HAVE IS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD FILE THE AFFIDAVIT.
WE DID THAT ALREADY AND THEN WE WOULD X THAT OUT AND THAT HE WOULD COMPLETE THE SUBDIVISION PLATTING PROCESS TO CONSOLIDATE ADDRESS THE UTILITY EASEMENT AND THEN WE'LL JUST SAY THE, UM, PARKLAND RESERVE ABANDONMENT TO BE FINALLY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO OTHERWISE YOU'RE GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS REQUESTED AND AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF IN THE, IN THE FORMAL PART OF THAT, THAT, UM, THAT MOTION.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS NOT IN ATTENDANCE AND THERE ARE NO PEOPLE WISHING FOR TO SPEAK.
UM, SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOST OF YOU TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? A.
UM, SO NOW WHILE WE HAVE BOARD DELIBERATION, NO DISCUSSION.
IS THERE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND? I'LL MOVE THE, OUR BOARD, UH, HAS ESTABLISHED FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINES A HARDSHIP HAS BEEN PROVEN FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCES SECTION 28 DASH 50 D TWO
[00:15:02]
AND HEREBY GRANTS THE VARIANCE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLETES THE SUBDIVISION PLATING PROCESS TO CONSOLIDATE, ADDRESSES THE UTILITY EASEMENT AND, UH, PARKLAND RESERVATION ABANDONMENT, UH, CONDITIONAL ON THAT FINAL APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL.ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.
I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.