Loading...
Reso 199 File No. 2-V-64 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 199 WHEREAS., the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received the application .of WARD CRUMP DEVELOPMENTS, INC. for a VARIANCE for _. front yard set backs of 15' where, ,Ordinance requires 20' ,. Lots 152, 153 and 154, Tract NNo". 3492, Baywood Terrace,; Unit #3; and WHEREAS, the applicant[ has .met: theburden of proof .r,equired 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 VAR- - IANCE be, and the. same is •hereby recommended for approval to the .City Council of the City Of Cupertino: for appropriate .action, subject to the following conditions: .. 1- 'Plot plans .be submitted. . . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: . . • That the report of findings : attached hereto -are approved and adopted, and that the .Secretary be, . and is hereby .dir-ected to notify the parties'.affected. by, this decision: . • PASSED •AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission' of the City.: of Cu- pertino, State of. California, this 23d day of March, 1964, by the following roll .cali vote: • AYES.: Commissioners -• Adamo., .Small, Snyder, Thomson, Fitzgerald NOES; Commissioners -. Tone • . .ABSENT i Commissioners;.--- Frolich, Rampy. • , /s/` Jerry•Fitzgerald Vice-Chairman,Planning Commission ATTEST": ' /s/ Robert S. Shook Secretary, Planning Commission . • -1- • File No. 2-11-64 • • • • • • • , • . . , . ., • • • v, • . • •• . • .„ , . • . - • , •• •• • • -.REPORT OF FINDINGS. •• . . • • .• • •• • • • • .• • • • • • •, . •. : The application for a: VAAIANCE on behalf,ofWARD: CIPT DEVELOP- MENTS,, INC. shows: •.. • 1. That there are specialcOndftiOht. br_pxcep.tional dbar- „adteribtics.,14 :the..nature. of the property to be affected or that itEe:lo-catio.:1,1:-or- 4:t!.':62'.P.IirrOundings-:are.::suchas:.,will. permit :the -:...:,CoMMissionto. M4.1.c0,14HdeterMination that .A literal entorbelft0#: of the Ordinance would result in practical difficulties or un hedessary .hardships.; ' and' 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial .property rights; and . • • ••., That the granting of the application will not mater- ially affedt adversely the health -or safety of' persons residing working - in ,the neighbOrhockUof the property whiCh is thesubo- , ject of the application, and that the use of said property in the-MAhnermhich it is proposed to be used will not be materially - - • detriMental .tothe ..pUblid yelfare .Or- injuriousto the value of 410 property or improvements located in said surroundings. .• ,• .. • ,„ . • . , • • •, „. : j. • . „ • • • • •• • r . . . %.• „. • 7• • , • , ,• _ •• . -2- : •••.• • , . • • . . . . . • .„. . .. • 1• ., • . '