[00:00:03]
I NEED TO WAIT 30S. WE ALL SET. SO WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.
[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER ]
I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 11:59 ON MAY 13TH, 2026.PRESENT ARE GARY DICKEY, JANIE SCHWARTZ-SHWA.
I'M SO SORRY WRONG WAY, I APOLOGIZE. [LAUGHTER]. YOU'RE GOOD. AND MYSELF.
DANIELLE GRAHAM THE FIRST ACTION ITEM IS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WHICH WAS HELD. AUGUST 27TH I'M SO SORRY. AUGUST 27TH, 25. THANK YOU. AUGUST 27TH, 2025.
I WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE FOR THAT MEETING, SO I AM UNABLE TO VOTE.
THE. I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES FROM AUGUST 27TH.
I'M SORRY. OCTOBER 27TH, 2025. AUGUST 20TH.
AUGUST. AUGUST 27TH. OKAY, AUGUST. I WAS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.
SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED YOU MAY VOTE ON? CHAIR YOU MAY VOTE THE MINUTES WILL BE ACCEPTED AS DRAWN UP. OUR NEXT ACTION ITEM IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION AND TAKE POSSIBLE ACTION ON A VARIANCE REQUEST
[PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS ]
OF THE ANGLETON CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY 6.3 SINGLE FAMILY FOR A REAR YARD SETBACK REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED 20-FOOT DEPTH FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 632 TJ WRIGHT STREET, ANGLETON, TEXAS.I BELIEVE WE WILL HEAR FROM CITY FIRST. YES, I'LL INTRODUCE THE ITEM.
AS STATED, THIS IS A LOT LOCATED ON TJ WRIGHT.
IT'S AN IRREGULAR TRIANGULAR PIECE THAT'S BEEN SITTING THERE FOR A WHILE.
WE'VE HAD APPLICANT AFTER APPLICANT TRYING TO LOCATE A HOME ON THE PROPERTY.
BUT WITH OUR CURRENT ZONING CODE IN THE 6.3 SECTION OF THE CODE, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE REAR YARD AT 10-FEET MADE IT REAL DIFFICULT IN THIS SITUATION. BASICALLY THE SIDE YARD KIND OF LOOKS LIKE THE REAR YARD WHEN YOU HAVE A TRIANGLE.
BUT HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO TRY TO MAKE A GOOD FIT FOR THE LOT.
SO THEY PROPOSED A PLAN THAT WOULD BRING IN A NEW HOME ON THE LOT.
I WILL SAY THAT WE DID CONTACT ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE PROPERTY AS REQUIRED.
AND WE DID DULY POST THE NOTICE IN THE NEWSPAPER AFTER HAVING TO RESET THIS HEARING.
BUT STAFF HAD NO ISSUES. WE WEIGHED THE CRITERIA FOR ANALYZING VARIANCES WHERE WE BASICALLY FIGURE OUT THAT THERE IS NO IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES IF THIS WERE GRANTED.
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE WE THINK IS VALID BY BEING IN AN IRREGULAR SHAPED LOT, AND IT WILL ALLOW FOR, AS I STATED, A NEW HOME TO BE PLACED ON THE LOT THAT WILL ONLY PROPERLY BRING UP THE VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY.
THE ONLY INSTANCE WHERE WE HAD A QUESTION WAS IF THEY WANTED TO PUT IN A SHED, THEY MAY HAVE SOME DIFFICULTY TO PUT IT, YOU KNOW, MORE TOWARD THE BEHIND THE HOUSE, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SITUATED IN THE SIDE YARD.
WE FIGURED WITH ENOUGH RIGHT OF WAY AS IT'S ALREADY DELINEATED ON THE GRAPHIC, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, THAT THERE WOULD BE NO VISIBILITY ISSUES IN THIS INSTANCE WHEN THEY PULL UP TO THE INTERSECTION.
NEAREST INTERSECTION. SO THERE WAS NO ISSUE THERE AS WELL.
SO THIS IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. GRACE DOES HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT SHOW YOU SOME OF THE VISIBILITY WITH THE DRUGSTORE BEING ACROSS THE MAIN CORRIDOR, COUNTY ROAD 44 THERE. AND IF YOU JUST THIS IS JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT THE 3 TO 2 FRONTAGES THERE.
AND ALSO ANOTHER VIEW LOOKING TOWARD THE PROPERTY FROM THE NEAREST INTERSECTION SO THERE YOU HAVE IT. THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE SAMPLE MOTION THERE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY. CERTAINLY. ON THE APPLICATION IT STATES UNDER NUMBER SEVEN THE CITY PROPOSED FUTURE WIDENING OF HANCOCK. IS THAT GOING TO HAPPEN? AND WOULD THAT MAKE HIM HAVE TO TAKE THE FENCE BACK DOWN IN THE FUTURE? THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS DELINEATED.
[00:05:04]
WOULD BE DELINEATED, DELINEATED ON THE PLAT. SO THERE'S REALLY, REALLY NO REAL ISSUE THERE.AND THERE'S NO PROPOSED CITY PROJECT THAT I'M AWARE OF TO WIDEN THAT SECONDARY STREET, BUT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE PRESERVED RIGHT AWAY ON BOTH RIGHT OF WAYS. OKAY. SO THEY JUST CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING IN THAT AREA.
RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT HE DIDN'T PUT IT UP.
AND THEN FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, HE HAS TO TEAR IT DOWN.
BUT THEY MAY HAVE TO HAVE AN ABILITY TO PUT IN SOME PRIVACY FENCING.
BUT ON THE MAIN FRONTAGE IT HAS TO BE OKAY. SO I BELIEVE I OPEN A PROPERTY HEARING NOW.
PUBLIC HEARING YES, MA'AM. PUBLIC HEARING. [LAUGHTER] SO SORRY.
SO WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR, IF THEY WOULD ADDRESS THE PODIUM OR APPROACH THE PODIUM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. ANYBODY OPPOSED? SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SECOND AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SO WE WANT TO PRESERVE YOUR.
I MEAN, WOULD IT BE ANY WAY TO PUT ANY FENCE UP IF WE HAD TO TEAR IT DOWN IN THE FUTURE? JUST FOR A LITTLE PRIVACY IN THE BACKYARD? YES, SIR.
AS WE EXPLAINED ON THE FRONTAGE ON TJ WRIGHT.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND A OPEN STYLE FENCE AS IT RELATES TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE OKAY. AND THEN THE BACK. WE CAN WORK WITH YOU WITH THE PLACEMENT I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. BUT YOU'LL HAVE TO GET A PERMIT OF COURSE.
YES. YES, SIR. I'M READY FOR A MOTION. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION.
SO IT SAYS THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS ESTABLISHED FINDINGS OF FACT DETERMINES THAT A HARDSHIP HAS BEEN PROVEN FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCE OF THE CODE ORDINANCE SECTION 48-46 SF 6.3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SUBSECTION B2C MINIMUM SETBACK OF 20FT REQUIRED TO ALLOW FOR A HOME TO BE PLACED CLOSER THAN REQUIRED FOR THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS 10-FEET LINE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES TO ALLOW THE MOTION AS STATED.
AND I THINK THAT'S ALL OF OUR BUSINESS TODAY.
YES, MA'AM. I WILL ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 12:07.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [LAUGHTER].
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.