Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Variance Whitlock topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission declines setback variance for 407 S. 6th St.

City of Alpine Planning Commission · February 23, 2026
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

Commissioners declined to approve a setback variance for 407 S. 6th St. after staff said the applicant had not completed a required deed transfer and a neighbor objected; the commission said a recorded deed would be needed before approval.

ALPINE, Texas — The City of Alpine Planning Commission on Feb. 23 declined a motion related to a setback variance for 407 S. 6th St., a nonconforming property owned by Nancy L. Whitlock.

Commission staff described variance 2026-02-01 as a request to allow a 0‑foot setback where the city's standard is 25 feet, for a structure that predates current setback rules. "The acceptable setback is typically 25 feet ... This variance would allow the subject property 0 feet of setback from structure to the property line," the public‑hearing notice read.

David Brito spoke during public comment on behalf of his mother, Alisa Brito, and noted he emailed the city secretary in advance. Brito told the commission the family objected to the variance application.

Building official Jessica Isley explained staff had received a recent survey and said the applicant had indicated plans to purchase six feet of adjacent land to resolve an encroachment. "She would have to own that 6 feet," Isley said, and, without acquisition, "she wouldn't be able to move forward with any renovations." Staff and commissioners discussed that benefits tied to a variance should follow the deed transfer and that the application had been accepted before recordation of any purchase.

After discussion and noting a neighbor's objection submitted that morning, commissioners signaled they could not approve the application as presented. The transcript records commissioners indicating "nay" on the motion and later states the commission "voted to not approve" the request. The transcript does not record a roll‑call tally or specify next administrative steps beyond advising the applicant that deed transfer will be required before proceeding.

The commission also discussed that a nonconforming structure may be maintained for weatherization but would not qualify for occupancy changes without satisfying ownership and setback requirements.