The Brenham Board of Adjustment took no action on the lone item on the agenda for its meeting Monday.

The board was set to hold a public hearing for a request by Titan Premier Investments for a special exception from the city, allowing for a 20-foot front yard setback where a minimum 25-foot front yard setback is required at a single-family home at 904 West Jefferson Street.

However, the applicant was unable to attend the meeting and several citizens had questions.  Therefore, the item was tabled until the next meeting that the applicant is able to attend.

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry


  1. I dont really understand all the flack that is being spoken about ! How do we know if the person that was to show up to this meeting contracted Covod-19 and is in quarantine !

    Yes we still have people getting this ! It cleary states that he will be able to make next week’s meeting.

    Why don’t you all go there next Monday when he is there and express your feelings to him directly?

  2. If you do not understand how the unnecessary costs are incurred then you are probably considered a good Candidate for the next position as fourth city manager, in addition to the existing three, that are driving the city to financial ruins.

  3. Since the applicant failed to make the meeting; is the applicant being held responsible for all associated costs for the meeting that he failed to attend? The taxpayers should not have to foot this bill. Taxpayers deserve an answer.

    1. That is not a common sense question, what cost do you believe were incurred? Taxpayers foot the bill for the Brenham board no matter what. How would you like to pay cost of a meeting that is canceled? Canceled meetings happen often in business, it is part of doing business. You just work around the cancellation and move on. Be sensible!

    2. I agree with Taxpayer 100%!!! The applicant should not only have to pay those costs but not be granted their request, but I guess we will wait and see! I’m sure if the City Manager has anything to say it will be a non-issue and dismissed! #fireJamesFisher

    3. Maybe the applicant had no say in when the meeting was held? Maybe they had an emergency?

      1. The meeting was probably scheduled a month in advance after discussion with the staff on the issue. They wasted the boards time and the taxpayers dollars by having to pay the staff for the work and overtime that went into the case. If they would have met the code none of this would have been necessary. The same code that everyone else has to follow by the way.

        1. Variance requests are just as much a part of the law as the restrictions that give rise to them. There’s nothing about what’s happened here that indicates unequal access or favoritism and it’s better to have an open and formal process for these things than to put citizens in a position where they have to approach their council members about ordinance modifications to accommodate one-off projects. Also, yes it is reasonable to believe that a City staffer might have been slightly inconvenienced. That’s okay. It is their actual job to facilitate interactions with the public. They are working for us. Besides which, do you really want to live in the kind of place where a local government stands so firmly in the way of people trying to invest their money into our community that they won’t even hear out a simple five-foot variance request? Even if the answer is ultimately no, there should be plenty of opportunities to get to yes.

Back to top button