Reso 116 File No. 2 -U-62
410 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 116
WHEREAS, the Planning .Commission of the City of Cupertino received
the application of Ditz-Crane
for a VARIANCE forside-yard setbacks of 3' 6" and 8'2" on lots 53 and •
• 62., Tract 3149, Somerset; Minute Order Oct .. 7, 196 . Council recommended
variance of S' 2" on Lot 5 and 816" on Lot 6, Tract 3149, Somerset in addition
to recommendation of Nov. 5, 1962 as above. and
•
WHEREAS, the applicant has, W`` iy3 ',- met the. burden. o.1 proof re-
quired to support his said application.
•
•
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED::
That after' careful considerati orz` of maps, facts exhibits ,and other
evidence submitted in this matter the application for the' VARIAN CE be,
vW/a , and the same is, hereby recommended • for approval to the
City Council of the City of� Cupertino for appropr.iate action, -p '�`¢'"
/V P' '^/I _7 p'�id ' f / ' i'`c 'a W'a h ` ,1* 'z ,j f ' ` `d 0. /�-
.''���'��5'�'J�`�/� i���/�`;o.�f�,r.�� , I��'`�, �i, ��=,�, ����� �5��, �-,�-�, S�f�, Ski`3nsa, /;� �.
•
® 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 Cupertinc
State of California, this 3th day of October , 1962 , by the
following roll call vote:
•
AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Snyder
NAYS: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Small
/ / (;h=;r1PR K.
Chairman of the Planning Comm.
ATTEST
Lawrence K. M rti n
Secretary of the Planning Commission
•
File No
' REPORT- OF FINDINGS
411
The application for a VARIANCE on behalf of
shows:
•
1e. That there are special conditions or exceptional characteristics
in the nature of 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 of; the Ordinance would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships; 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 the 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 detrimepta - to the public welfare or in-
jurious to the value of property or, imProvements located in• said surr-
Qundings.
•
•
•
•
•
110
-2-