Reso 060 File No. 13. V
410 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 60.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commissionof the City of Cupertino received
the application of HERBERT KETET,TL, INC.
for a VARIANCE for sideyard setbacks on 18 lots, northwest corner of
Highway 9 and .Stevens. Creek Boulevard.
•
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has, tier xnalX, met the burden of proof re-
quired to support his said application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and other
evidence submitted in this matter, the application for the VARIANCE be,
riax=.., and the same is, XxXxmt, hereby recommended for approval to the
City Council of the City of Cupertino for appropriate action, subject
to the terms and conditions which are attached hereto and made apart
hereof as Exhibit "A" ,
•
None
0 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the report of findings attached hereto approved and adopted,
and that the Secretary be, and is hereby, directed to notify the parties
affected by this decision,
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino,
State of California, this 24th day of July , 19' 61 , by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Bagar, Frolich, Rampy, .Snyder., Small
NAYS: Commissioners: Adamo
•
ABSENT: Commissioners: Leonard.
/s/ E. J. Small
Chairman of the Planning Comm,
ATTEST:
•
/sf Lawrence K. Martin
Secretary of the Planning Commission
•
-1-
File No, 13 V
REPORT :OF FENDINGS.
411
TYe., applicati on for a VARIANCE on behalf of. .. .: HERBER2± KETELty INC,
- . shows:
_ 1. That there are special °conditi ns or -exceptional characteristics
in the nature bf the property to be affected or that it ' s location, or
it ' s surroundings are such as will permit the Commission to make a deter-
mination that a literal enforcement of1the' Ordinance would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardslhips; -and .
•
2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the pre-
servation and enjoyment of substantial -property rights; , and .
3. . That the granting of-the application will not .materially affect
adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the property which is :tt e subject of the application,
and that. the use. of said property in the manner which it is proposed to-
be ,used will not be materially detrimental to the public, welfare or in-
jurious to the value of property or improvements located in 'said surr-
oundings,
.
.
.
.
0
•
-2- '
11