Reso 2210 2-V-81
RESOLUTION NO. 2210
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL,'OF A VARIANCE
410 TO ALLOW AN 8 FT. SIDE YARD SETBACK DISTANCE
AND TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-CAR GARAGE.
APPLICANT: Ronald E. Jones
ADDRESS : 10205 Scenic Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: April 7, 1981
LOCATION: North side of Scenic Boulevard approximately 100 ft. easterly
of Carmen Road
•
FINDINGS:
The Planning Commission finds as follows with respect to this application;
1. Approval of a reduced side yard setback is justified because the applicant
purchased his pre-cut home on the basis of County setback regulations,
without knowledge of an impending annexation to the City of Cupertino .
Denial of this application would present financial hardships to the property
owner. A reduced side yard will not adversely impact adjoining properties .
2. The approval of the variance permitting a single car garage is justified
because single car garages are common to the area and adherence to a two
car requirement would force the applicant to remove a tree which is
valuable to the applicant and neighborhood.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
ID1-14. Standard Conditions to the extent that they do not conflict with the
special conditions enumerated herein. In the event a conflict does
exist, the special conditions as enumerated herein shall apply. +
15. The approval is based upon Exhibit A of Application 2-V-81 as may be
amended by special conditions contained herein.
16. The 8 ft. side yard depicted on Exhibit A is approved.
17. The applicant shall provide a single car garage as described on Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this llth day of May, 1981, 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, Binneweg, Blaine, Chairman Claudy
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Koenitzer
ATTEST: APPROVED:
• /s/ John Claudy
40 Robert Cowan John Claudy, Chairman
Assistant Planning Director Planning Commission
•
-2- •
VARIANCE
FINDINGS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS
I
WHEN RECOMMENDING THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL
MAKE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS :
1. That there are special conditions or exceptional characteristics
in the nature of the property to be affected, or that its loca-
tion or its surroundings are such as will permit the Commission
to make a determination 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 preserva-
tion and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and
3. That the hearings show 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 in which it is proposed to be used will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
value of property or improvements located in said surroundings.
ADDITIONALLY, AS A PART OF THE COMMISSION'S ACTION, SUBCONCLUSIONS IN"
SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS SHALL BE MADE ORALLY, THUS BECOMING A PART
OF THE RECORD, PRIOR TO FINAL VOTE ON -THE APPLICATION.
411:
WHEN RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF A VARIANCE, THE COMMISSION SHALL ADDRESS
ALL OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS. IF THE COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO MAKE ONE OR
MORE OF THE FINDINGS, THE RECOMMENDATION MUST BE FOR DENIAL. SUBCONCLUSIONS
IN SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS SHALL BE. MADE ORALLY, THUS BECOMING A PART
OF THE RECORD, PRIOR TO .FINAL VOTE ON THE APPLICATION.
•
•
1-20-77