CC Resolution No. 4274 ~
RESOLUTION N0. 4274
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO KENNETH J. AND CLAUDIA E. BLACKMON
FROM SECTION 10.4 OF ORDINANCE 220(n) REDUCING THE RE-
QUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK FROM TWENTY TO FIFTEEN FEET FOR
A TWO-STORY BUILDI~NG; LOCATED AT 22074 BAXLEY COURT ALSO
COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS LOT S OF TRACT 5561
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support
his said application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearings,
has forwarded its recommendation to the City Council;
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 (7-V-76) be and the same is hereby approved, subject to
conditions in Planning Commission Resolution No. 1584, attached hereunto as
Exhibit "A".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the report of findings attached hereto is
approved and adopted, and that the City Clerk be and is hereby directed to
notify the parties affected by this decision.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this 4th day of October , 1976, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES: Frolich, Nellis, Meyers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None .
DISSENT: Jackson, 0'Keefe APPROVED:
/s/ Robert W. Meyers
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ATTEST:
/s/ Wm. E. R;~der
City Clerk
~-v-~6
RESOLUTION N0. 1584
OF THE PLANNING COi~IlKISSION OF TIiE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING~APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 10.4
OF ORDINANCE 220(n) REDUCING THE REQUIRED REAR YARD
SETBACK FROM TWENTY (20) TO FIFTEEN (15) FEET FOR A
TWO-STORY BUILDING.
APPLICANT: Kenneth J. and Claudia E. Blackmon
ADDRESS: 1068 November Drive, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: September 1, 1976
LOCATION: 22074 Baxley Court (Lot 5 of Tract 5561)
FURTHER FINDINGS:
That the variance application is justified because of the exceptional circum-
stances related to the particular lot in question. Inasmuch as the rear
property line is common to an existing City park, the intent of the setback
for two-story buildings from the privacy intrusion standpoint is in effect
still maintained in view of the adjacent open space area. Additionally,
the location of mature, native trees on the site and the desire of the
applicant for building orientation to provide for future solar energy
possibilities dictate circumstances peculiar to the lot in question that '
are not common to other lots within the immediate neighborhood. The lot
configuration as related to the cul-de-sac is not a common cul-de-sac
lot design, and,therefo~'e, does represent a physical constraint related
to this particular lot. , ,
~ . . .
. ~ .
CONDITIONS:
1-14. Standard Conditions to the extent that they do not conflict ~aith the
special conditions enumerated herein. In the event a conflict does
exist, the special conditions as enumerated herein shall apply.
15. That the approval is based upon Exhibit A, lst Revision, as may be
amended by any additional conditions contained herein. .
.16. That the requested front yard variance is not approved and the ~
~~applicant shall be required to set back a minimum of 25,ft. as provided .
for in the conditions of approval for Application 3-TM-74.
' PASSED ANn ADOPTED this 29th day of September, 1976, at a regular adjourned
meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California,
by the-following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Blaine, Woodward, Chairman Adams
NAYS: Commissioner Koenitzer
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Gatto
ATTEST: ~ APPROVED:
/s/ Victor J Adams
James H. Sisk Victor J. Adams, Chairman
Planning Director Plarrziing Commission
~X ~ l%/' I l
-2- / ~
v-. .
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 .Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
(408) 252-4505
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING THE GRANTING 0~' ~ VARIANCE
WHEREAS the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received
~ an application for a Variance, as stated on Page 2; and
FIHEREAS the applicant has met the burden of proof required to sup-
port his said application; and
WHEREAS the application shows:
1. That there are special conditions or exceptional character-
istics in the nature of the property to be affected, or that
its location or its surroundings are such as will permit the
. Commission to make a determination that a literal enforce-
ment of the Ordinance would result in practical difficulties
or unnecessary hardships; and
2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the
preservation 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 pexsons.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 pro-
posed to b.e used will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or in~urious to the value of property or
improvements located in said surroundings;
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, and the same is, hereby recommended for approval to
the City Council of the City of Cupertino for appropriate action,
subject to the conditions stated on Page 2; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the aforementioned findings are approved and adopted, and
that the Secretary be, and is hereby, directed to notify the
" parties affected by this decision. .
(Continued on Page 2)
-1-