Reso 25211-EXC-84
RESOLUTION NO. 2521
10 OF THE PLANNING -COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DENYING AN EXCEPTION FROM 16.28.040 OF THE FENCE
ORDINANCE TO PERMIT A 6..FT. FENCE IN THE FRONT
SETBACK AREA IN LIEU OF THE MAXIMUM 3 FT. FENCE
PERMITTED BY ORDINANCE.
APPLICANT: Mark Della Bona and Jan L. Jensen
ADDRESS: 21S28 Alcazar Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: May 1, 1984
LOCATION:- 21828 Alcazar Avenue - South Side of Alcazar Avenue
approximately 200 ft. west of Orange Avenue.
FINDINGS:
Denial is subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and the
subconclusions as -set forth in the minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting of June 11, 1984.
a.. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this
ordinance will not result in restrictions inconsistent with
the spirit and intent of this ordinance;
b. That the granting of the exception will result in A
condition which is materially detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare;
C. That the requested exception is not- one that will require
the least modification of the prescribed regulation and the
minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
d. That the proposed exception will result in a hazardous
condition for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of June, 1984, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino,
State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams, Claudy, Koenitzer, Szabo,
-Chairperson Blaine
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
• /s:/ James H. Sisk
_ --------------------
James H. Sisk
Planning Director
APPROVED:
—Lsl Sharon Blaine
-----------------------
Sharon Blaine, Chairperson
Planning Commission
C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N 0
City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: (408) 252-4505
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING AN
EXCEPTION.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an
application for an exception,. as stated on Page 2; and -
WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support
his said application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the application does not meet
all of the following requirements:
a. That the literal enforcement'of the provisions of this ordinance
will result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and
intent of this ordinance; i
b. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition
which is materially detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare;
C. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the
least modification of the prescribed regulation and the minimum
variance that will accomplish the purpose; and
d. That the proposed exception will not result in a hazardous
condition for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application for the exception be, and the same
is hereby denied; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the findings quoted above and on page two be approved and adopted,
and that the Secretary be, and is hereby directed to notify the parties
affected by this decision.
(Continued on page 2)