The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About183 Zoning Board of Adjustment January 18, 1983•I AGENDA City of College Station, Texas Zoning Board of Adjustments January 18, 1983 7:00 P.H. 1. Approval of Minutes from December 7, 1982. 2. Reconsideration of a request for a variance to Parking Requirements (Section 7) at 108 Walton which is located next to Wilson's Plumbing Supply. Request is in the name of J. F. & T. M. Sousares. 3 . Consideration of a request for a variance to Rear Setback Requirements (Table A) at 1004 Walton Drive. Request is in the name of Wayne & Mary Saslow. 4. Other business. 5. Adjourn. ) ) MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: MINUTES CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Zoning Board of Adjustments December 7, 1982 7:00 P.M. Chairman Cook, Members Upham, Wagner, MacGilvray, and Council Liaison Boughton Donahue and Alternate Member Lindsay Zoning Official Kee, Assistant Director of Planning Callaway and Planning Technician Volk Approval of Minutes -, meeting of November 2, 1982 Mr. Wagner made a motion to approve the minutes ~ Mr . MacGilvray seconded. Motion to approve minutes carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a request for a variance concerning business closing hours previously established as a result of action taken by Board when considering a variance. Request is in the name of t&R Foods, Inc. Mrs. Kee explained the request. Mr . Wagner inquired if this was a matter which must be handled by the Board and Mrs. Kee replied that it is because it is one of the condi- tions set at the time a parking variance was granted. Bill Payne was sworn in . He stated he is an attorney and is representing L&R Foods, Inc. He addressed the closing time (9 p.m.) which was part of the parking variance granted in 1981 and gave a history of this pizza business which at the time of the variance was a sandwich shop. He stated the Lampos are now asking for permission to operate beyond the 9 p.m. hour, questioned whether regulations for parking should govern operating hours, and stated the purposes for establ isheing off-street parking as listed in the Zoning Ordinance are (l)to el imiriate occurrence of non-resident on-street parking in ~ . adjoining neighborhood; (2)to avoid the traffic congestion and public safety hazards caused by a failure to provide such parking space; and (3)to expedite the movemen~ of traffic on public thoroughfares in a ' safe manner ... He then named the businesses in the immediate vicinity which also close at 9 p.m. or before, and said the point is that virtually all activity in the immediate area during the requested extension hours is eliminated due to hours of operation of the businesses there, with exception of the Wesley Foundation, which stays open until 11 p.m. He indicated his clients had attempted to make a survey of the available parking spaces in the area, handed out copies of the results of the survey and explained how it had been done , He said the results show that there are no less than 20 parking spaces available on-street after 9 p.m. on every night the survey was taken. He explained there are 66 chairs, 22 tables in the restaurant, and estimated a maximum of 22 spaces would ever be needed. The survey had asked over 700 patrons how they had gotten to this establishment, and the results showed that only 11 % of the patrons drove. He broke this figure down to indicat e that one customer in 10 would have a car to park. He said the hours they are requesting to operate are until midnight on weeknights and 1 a.m. on ~eekends. Mr. MacGilvray asked why the orig i nal request was for operating hours of 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. and Mr. Payne explained these hours were established prior to the actual establish- ment of a business. Mr. Wagner asked why they had waited so long after the Pizza Hut was actually in operation to make this request, and Mr. Payne explained that the . ' ZBA Minutes 12-7-82 page 2 initial variance had been granted one year ago, and after that one year, Mr. Lampo and Mrs. Kee had begun dialogue, but the Lampos did not understand that the hours were a determining factor to granting the parking variance. Mr. Wagner congratulated him on the preparation for this reque s t, and then referred to a mandate handed down by the City Council which precludes any variances to parking requirements being granted for a 12 month period which bagan in September of this year. Mrs. Cook began to give a bit of history concerning the previous variance and Mr. Upham continued to explain exactly what had taken place at the public hearing which led up to the Board granting the variance which included the hours of operation as a signi- ficant factor in the agreement to grant it. _Mrs. Cook then explained the mandate under which the Board must operate now, explaining that there will be no parking variances given for one year in Northgate . She expressed appreciation for the survey information, indicating that it may well be used by the Committee studying the Northgate area, but feels the Board is committed to the mandate set down and the Zoning Ordinance spells out the requirements concerning the number of parking spaces which must be provided off-street and on-site. Mr. MacGilvray further explained the Ordinance, and also thinks this request must fall under the moratorium established by the Council. ' Mr. Payne asked about this mandate and proposed that the only request now is for hours of operation and suggested that it be granted on a moratorium basis also until the Northgate study is complete. Mr. Upham explained this Board cannot take action on any parking variances for this 12 month period in this area, and if this variance had been for something other than parking, there would be no problem. Council Liaison Boughton confirmed the mandate requirements and then further pointed out that at the time of the original request, Mr. Lampo said there was no problem with parking, but in · fact, the churches in the area had at that time complained about people other than \ church committee members using their parking lots. ) Mr. Wagner then made a motion to table this motion until the mandate set down by the Council concerning parking variances in the Northgate area is removed. Mr. MacGi ·lvray seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration of a r e uest for a variance to Parkin Re uirements Section 7 at 108 Walton which is located next to Wilson 1 s Plumbing Supply. Request is in the name of J. F. & T. M. Sousares. Mrs. Kee explained the request and said that a medical office building is being pro- posed which would require 10 spaces on-site off-street according to the Ordinance.· She further indicated that Mr. Sousares has not been through a formal site plan review, but that he has met with the Director of Planning for preliminary discussions. Mr. MacGilvray asked about front, rear and side setbacks, and Mrs. Kee explained the appl i- cant could have lot 1 ine construction in commercially zoned areas with a required firewall which is governed by building codes. Discussion fol lowed with Mrs. Kee pointing out the area on an aerial photo. Jimmy Sousares, one of the applicants, was sworn in and said the building would be an emergency type medical office with perhaps several rooms and probably no more than 3 employees. He said he owns the plumbing shop building next door, and that some park- ing would be available there because no work is done on the premises so very few patrons use the available parking spaces. Mr. Upham suggested the City make some kind of survey or study to find out the width of the access road, who maintains it and what- ever else is available on the tract. Mr. Upham then made a motion to table this request and to direct the Building Official to find out what the geography is at that location. Mr. MacGilvray asked to point out that the Ordinance requires off-street parking, and further pointed out that a lot to provide the required parking for this building would be larger than the lot. Mr. Upham said this is a special interest situation and the pub! ic could possibly be well served by the granting of a variance. ) ZBA Minutes 12-7-82 page 3 Mr. MacGilvray pointed out that in essence, Mr. Upham would be referring to a City- owned parking lot. Mr. Upham reiterated his motion and Mr. Wagner seconded, with the condition that the motion be amended to say 11 Zoning Official 11 rather than 11 Building Official 11 , and that the request be tabled until the next regular meeting of the ZBA. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other Business Mrs. Kee asked the Board to choose a date for the Workshop with the City Attorney, and the Board chose January 11th or 12th. Mrs. Cook requested the staff to take a car-count at the AM/PM Clinic in Bryan on weekends and 'evenings to help determine the amount of traffic generated at such a business. Mr. MacGilvray gave a report on the Northgate Committee indicating a survey of busi- nesses in the area had been done and data 4s being compiled, and that more data is being generated including population figures, bus traffic, traffic counts, etc. Mr. Upham suggested that perhaps the number of parki!ng violations and number of accidents could be helpful, as well as the revenue generated in that area. Mr. Wagner made a motion to adjourn with Mr. ·Upham seconding. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVED: Vi Cook, Chairman ATTEST: Dian Jones, City Secretary .f .. ' ' I January 10, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 0 1 TEXAS AV.ENUE . COLLEGE S T ATION, TEXAS 77840-2499 Zoning Board of Adjustments '/~ Jane R. Kee, Zoning Off ici~~ Agenda Items, January 18, ~ Meeting " ' AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Reconsideration of a re uest for a variance to Parkin uire- ments (Section 7 of Ordinance 850 at 108 Walton which is located next to Wilson's Plumbing Supply. Request is in the name of J. F. & T. M. Sousares. This item was tabled at the last meeting pending further information concerning park- ing along Walton Drive. Using Highway Department R.O.W. maps the Engineering Depart- ment has estimated the location of the R.O.W. of Walton Drive. (This will be indicated on a map available at the meeting.) It seems that most of the parking in front of the lots in question is on City R.O.W. (approximately from Lot 10 through Lot 21). There appears to be approximately 50 spaces. (Since there is no formal striping this is an estimate.) The following is a breakdown of the existing buildings and the parking requirement for each based on the City's present Zoning Ordinance : Lots 18-20 -Thirsty Turtle 190 seats 64 spaces required Lot 10 -Wi 1 son Plumbing -1200 sq.ft. -4+ spaces required Lot 13 -Pruitt Beauty Shop-715 sq. ft. -3+ spaces required Lot 14' 15 -Acme G 1 ass · -5218 sq.ft. -17+ spaces required Lots 16' 16 -Insurance Ofc.: -1168 sq.ft. -4+ spaces required 15' Lot 20,21 -Dentist -1756 sq.ft. -12 spaces required 104+ spaces required As is evident, many more spaces are required by Ordinance than are presently available. Observation of this parking area took place when the students were · gone for the holiday and there were ample daytime spaces. However, no one can be certain that this situation will remain the same once the school semester begins. Furthermore, as all spaces are on-street, there is no guarantee that this area will always be available for parking. The clinic in Bryan which serves a similar purpose to the one proposed here is a 4800 sq. ft. building with 20 parking spaces provided. There is one doctor per shift and 2-3 treatment rooms. There has been no parking problem encountered thus far. No appointments are accepted at tne clinic. Please keep in mind when considering the information on the clinic in Bryan that our Zoning Ordinance makes no distinction between this type of clinic and any other medical .. ZBA Memorandum January 10, 1983 page 2 office or clinic (exclusive of hospitals) and a decision should be based on this use as categorized in Ordinance 850. In other words, a decision should be based on the category of use -medical clinic-requiring 1 space/150 sq. ft. regardless of ho w it will function or whether appointments are, or are not given. AGENDA ITEM NO . 3: Consideration of a re uest for a variance to Rear Setback Re uire- ments (Table A of Ordinance 850 at 1004 Walton Drive. Request is in the name of Wayne & Mary Saslow. The applicant is requesting a variance to the rear setback for the placement of a separate room to function as an art studio for the homeowner. Please refer to the application, as it is self-explanatory. The site plan enclosed indicates a 12 foot utility easement along the rear of this property. It is actually a City alley o r public easement and not a part of this lot, and herein 1 ies the need for the variance. JK/sjv .. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO. ' -.. Location: Lot 11 ----Block 3B ---Subdivision COLLEGE HILLS Action requested: Var_!!E~~!!> Parking Requirements Seetl~~~7-----------~ NAME ADDRESS (From current tax rolls, College Station Tax Assessor) .. ' ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO. Present zoning of land in question C-1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Section of ordinance from which variance is sought Section 7 ~~-'-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: ~rlB:ifteQodmedc:iHurabeaxJdSc:~D:>aX!<bcoe<:x><t!c~ To Allow 6 Parking Units ( 3 in Front and 3 at rear) of Lot 11 Block 3B College Bills Subdivision of the City of College Station. This variance is necessary due to the following unique an<l special conditions of the land not found in like districts: The Lot in Queation is only 25 feet wide in Front and less than 23 feet in Reaw • Parkin~ Spaces to meet Variance Request will be taken in Part from Land next d~or, Owned by Same Party . . · The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: Recause of the Size of the Property, no Alternatives are availahle, The Entire ' •' Front and the Entire 'Rear of the Property will be used to Meet the Primary Variation Request. This variance will not be contrary to the p_ublic interest by virtue of the following ., £::i~ t~: Sufficient Parking will he Available.., on Street or in Adjacent Areas Without the PossiblJ.ty of Going into Adjacent neighborhoods. The facts stated by me in this application are true and correct. #~~~ --· ' Blk. 3-B, Lots 1-9 College Hills Fontana, Joseph 1216 Munson College Station, Tx. 77840 Blk. 3-B, Lot 12,tl3 College Hills Pruitt, John H. Drawer A B College Station, Tx. 77840 Blk. 3-B, Lot l4,T5 ~-22 :Ci:il'iege Hills Morehead, Bruce & Leonard 116 Walton, College Sta~ion, Tx. 77840 '. Blk. 3-B, Lot 16, 17 College Hills Redmond, H. E. Box 9965 College Station, Tx. 77840 Blk. 3-B, Lot 18, 19, lO'of 20 College Hills Ganter, Don B. 307 University Dr. College Station, Tx. 77840 Blk. 3-B, Lot 35 1 of 20, 21 College Hills White, Robert C. 710 S. Rosemary Dr. Bryan, Tx. 77801 Blk. 3, Lot l College Hills Payne, Vestal S. % J. B. Payne 217 Hird St. Gainesville, Tx. 76240 Blk 3, Lot 2 College Hills Scasta, W. C. Jr. Rt. l Box 87 Bryan, Tx. 77840 Blk. l, Lot 5 College Hills Robinson, R. M. And Dorothy 103-A Walton Dr. College Station, Tx. 77840 Blk .-1, Lot 6 College Hills Destefano, Frank & Bessie . . \ Trust % S. F. Destefano Grandchildren Box 256 Mumford, Tx. 77867 Blk. l, lot 7, 8, 9, 19 College Hills Culpepper, J. C. Jr. Drawer JC College Station, Tx. 77840 TAMU James Bond 319 Systems Bldg. College Station, Tx. 77 843 l .... .. ' NOTES ON CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST Zoning Board of Adjustment Hearing Request by--··------------------:---------' Applicant Board Members Participating: This request is for a variance of -------------------- -------------~--------, Section Describe Nature of Request: What public interest or interests are involved? How is the public interest affected? Identify any existing special conditions.associated with this property. Special conditions identified by the applicant include: Id:entify any unnecessary hardships. relating to this property. Identify any hardships unique to· this property. If this request is granted, how will the "spirit of the ordinance" be observed? Describe the rational you have us e d to come to your decision in this matter. .. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAT FOR MOTIONS Variances: From Se ction ll-8.5 move to (authorize or deny) a variance to the -, . yard (6-G) ------- lot width (Table A) ------- lot depth (Table A) ------- sign regulations (Section 8) ------- _______ minimum setback,.(Table,A) parking requirements (Sec t ion 7) --------' from the terms of this ordinanc e as it (will not, will) be contrary to the public interest, due to the (lack of, following) unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts: l. s. ________________ ...;_ _______________ _ 2. 6. 3 . 7 .' ________________ ...;_ _______________ _ 4. 8. and becaus e a strict enforcem J nt ~of the provisions of the Ordinance (would, would not) result in unnece s sary hardship, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done, and with the following special conditions: l. 4. 2. 5. 3. 6. '. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO. ---- Name of Applicant -""'i1l""a'--'y-'-n.:..::e::.........:a:::..:....:.n..:::d___,_M"""a'-'r,_y,__"""S=a=s-=l=o=w,__ ________________ _ Mailing Address ___ 1_0_0_4_11~Ja"--'-l~t_o_n--'D_r~1~·v_e~,~C~o~l~l~e~g~e-· -~-t~a_t~i~o~n-~T~X--'7~7~8~4~0"'------ Phone 696 - 2 2 26 ----''-------'------ Location: Lot ES ¢--~--Block _7___._ __ Subdivision College Hills Estates - Description, If applicable Lot No. 3 except SllJ 20 feet and all of Lot No. 4. (/OD 4 tJ/f t. /t>AJ PR.._) Action requested: __ V_a_r_i_a_n_c_e __ o_n_r_e_a_r_~p_r_o~p_e_r_t_y~-_l_i_n_e_s~e-'-t_b~a~c_k~,'---'f~r~o==m-=2=5'--'f~e~e=-=-t- to 15 feet. . NAME ADDRESS (From current tax rolls, Colle~e Station Tax Assessor) G • p. Parker 1 0 7 IAI a 1 ton Dr iv e Linda L • Carrier : 1001 Puryear Drive .East I l\lan Fredericks ! 1002 llJ alton Drive . IYla r tha P. Cannon 1006 l!J alton Drive Georqe Heubner 1008 !A la 1 ton Drive Robert ~egner 1010 ~la 1 ton Drive !. J. R. Callaway 1003 Puryear Drive East Elsie S auer 1005 Puryear Drive East Joe N. Love 1007 Puryear Drive East Beatrice Cullen 1009 James Parkway East Eugene D. Young 1011 James Parkway East John Dennison 1001 l\lalton Drive Jim Dozier 1003 Wa 1 ton Drive Tsung Chow Su 1005 llJ a 1 ton Drive John Nie be r 413 11.J a 1 ton Drive John l\llphin 411 flJ a 1 ton Drive ... ' ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO. Present zoning of land in question ~R_-_1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- Section of ordinance from which variance is sou gh t ··~T_a_.b_l_.e~-A~~~~~~~~~~~ The following specific v2riation from the ordinance is requested: ~~~~~~~~- Variance permitting building a building in the backyard with a 15 feet rather than 25 feet setback from the rear property line and utility easement. This variance is necessary due to the following unique and special conditions of the land not found in like districts: Since the building, an art studiCJ·, requires northern light and a view of the property, it should be pl•ced in the southern corner of the lot, well back in a st~nd oP bambo6 and trees, with large sliding glass doors facing across the width of the yard, and receiving light from the northeast.~· The irre g ular shape of the lot provides only a 15 foot setback. The following alternatives to the requested variance ar e possible: Two other QQ_Qr locations for the buildinq are possible: 1) closer to the old building, which would limit privacy, damage views, and require removing desirable trees and bushes; or 2) in rear ~~stern corner facing the old building, whic.h would provide a very 'hot north-west elevation, des'troy privacy and views, and provide no shade on th.a new bui.lding. . . . This variance will not be contrary to the, public interest by virtue of the following f~~t~: The area is deeply wooded with thick bamboo which fills the easement and encroaches on .our property. The building will not invade our neighbors' privacy, shielded as they are by distance and bamboo. The nearest buildings ~~-ctvel p will be two garage~1 about 10 and 15 feet from their property lines; the houses are a good deal further away. The facts stated by me in this application are true and corr e ct. January a,, 1983 App licant Date #. NOTES ON CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST Zoning Board of Adjustment Hearing Request by ------------------------------' Applicant Board Members Participating: This request is for a variance of -, ' Describe Nature of Request: What public interest or interests are involved? . . .r . \ How is the public interest affected? Identify any existing special conditions.associated with this property. Special conditions identified by the applicant include: Id:entify any unnecessary hardships.relating to this property. Identify any hardships unique to this property. If this request is granted, how will the "spirit of the ordinance" be observed? Describe the rational you have us e d to come to your decision in this matter. •• "' ZONING BOARD OF -ADJUSTMENT It \ i ~· f ' FORMAT FOR MOTIONS Variances: ·From Section 11-8.5 move to (authorize or deny) a variance to the yard (6-G) -------· · ... \.. lot width (Table A) ------- lot depth (Table A) ------- sign regulations (Section 8) ------- minimum setback,(Table A) ------- parking requirements (Section 7) ---------' from the terms of this ordinance as it (will not, will) be contrary to the public interest, due to the (lack of, following) unique and special conditions of the land not normally found in like districts: 1. 5. 2. 6. 3. 7 .' ------------------'----------------~ 4. 8. --------------.,...--------------------~ and because a strict enforcemJnt ~of the provisions of the Ordinance (would, would not) result in unnecessary hardship, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shal 1 be observed and substantial justice done, and with the _ following special conditions: 1. 4. 2. 5. 3. 6. January 18, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City of College Station POST OFFI CE BOX 9960 I I O I TEXAS A VENUE COLLEGE ST A TION. TEXAS 77840 Zoning Board of Adjustment Al Mayo, Director of Planning~ Agenda Items, Januari 18, 1983 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 -Sousares I met with the potential clinic tenant and her attorney on January 12, 1983 to discuss parking and site plan design problems. I was informed that the appli- cant actually owns the plumbing shop adjacent to this along with other undeveloped property. I suggested that they determine, by survey if necessary, exactly the available property and design a parking area/site plan. This is the only way to know how many parking spaces could be provided. There is also other undeveloped property immediately behind these tracts. I suggested that another alternative would be to investigate the possibility of purchasing this for parking. As usual with parking variance requests, the applicant has rejected all these alternatives In favor of the 11 do nothing and hope for a free ride 11 doctrine. Granted, College St ation needs a clinic, but how good is. it if you can't get to it? Many evenings I have seen this parking area so full that access through the area is very difficult. This is not the orrly clinic that we have a chance of getting; in fact, a small medical complex site plan has been submitted. Incidentally, it needs no variance. I recommend that we deny variance requests, especially when there are possible solutions that might require no vari~nce. An applicant should at least exhaust all efforts at a solution within the Ordinance. Until he has done this, how can he, or you, ~etermine an unnecessary hardship? AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 -Saslow I won't grace this request with many words. How can an appl leant with a lot this large ask for a variance to the setbacks and keep a straight face? AM/sjv .. ,.. .. ~. ··~ . ' . ~: .. ;~~~. _: , .. ~i~~r~_i.<11~~1• ~3'·" "'"~2~L. · \ January l L., 1983 The Zon ing Board of Adj ust me nt f or the City of College St a tion : We, the und e rsigne d , strongly op pose t he r e qu est fo r a va riance from the Zo ni ng Board of Adj ustment for the City of College Stat ion f rom: Wayne & Mary Saslow 1004 Walt on Drive College Station, Texas to be he a rd at the ne xt me eting of the Board on January 18 , 1983. We also strong l y oppose the use of this studio for commercial purposes since it is in a residential nei ghbo rhood . We feel that the abuse of the zoni ng laws would lead to the de valuation of our property and infringe upon our privacy a s well. Sincerely submitted, Name Add r ess /c?C.S-Y~~1~ ... d. 5.. 1007 P~ e .r . C!, s. January l L .. , 1 "83 The Zoning Board of Adjustme nt f or the City of Colle ge Station: We, the und e rsigne d , strongly op pose the request for a variance from the Zonin g Bo a r d of Adju s t me nt for the City of College Sta tion from: Wayne & Mar y Sa slow to b e heard at the next meeting of the Board on Janua r y 18 , 1983. It appears that t he gr a nting of t his variance would violate both the deed restrictions and Zoning Ordinanc e of Colle ge Hills, a nd in effect would rezone the property from residential to comme rcial . Also it woul d not only e f f e c t the economical value but the pleasure and enjoyment of our property . We sincerely reque st that this varia nce be d enied . Namm Addr e ss J oo7-~ -e.s - l 1 l l ' I /!) 6 3 /o c 3 January 18, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 0 1 TEXAS A VENUE COLLEGE STATION, T EXAS 77840 Zoning Board of Adjustment Al Mayo, Director of Planning~ Agenda Items, Januari 18, 1983 AGENDA ITEM NO . 2 -Sousares I met with the potential clinic tenant and her attorney on January 12, 1983 to discuss parking and site plan design problems. I was informed that the appl i- cant actually owns the plumbing shop adjacent to this along with other undeveloped property. I suggested that they determine, by survey if necessary, exactly the available property and design a parking area/site plan. This is the only way to know how many parking spaces could be provided. There is also other undeveloped property immediately behind these tracts. I suggested that another alternative would be to investigate the possibility of purchasing this for parking. As usual with parking variance requests, the applicant has rejected all these alternatives In favor of the "do nothing and hope for a free ride" doctrine. Granted, College Station needs a clinic, but how good is it if you can't get to it? Many evenings I have seen this parking area so full that access through the area is very difficult. This is not the orrly clinic that we have a chance of getting; in fact, a small medical complex site plan has been submitted. Incidentally, it needs no variance. I recommend that we deny variance requests, especially when there are possible solutions that might require no variance . An applicant should at least exhaust all efforts at a solution within the Ordinance. Until he has done this, how can he, or you, ·determine an unnecessary hardship? AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 -Saslow I won't grace this request with many words. How can an applicant with a lot this large ask for a variance to the setbacks and keep a strai~ht face? AM/sjv