CC Resolution No. 4470 i
RESOLUTION N0. 4470
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO VICTOR C. STEVENS FROM SECTION 9.4
OF ORDINANCE 780 TO ALLOW REDUCTION OF REQUIRED REAR YARD
SETBACK FOR A TWO-STORY BUILDING FROM 25 FT. TO 20 FT.;
LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND NORTHERLY OF BAXLEY COURT APPROXI-
MATELY 290 FT. WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF BAXLEY
COURT AND LINDA VISTA DRIVE
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 as Exhibits "A",
"B", and "C", the application for the Variance (2-V-77) be and the same is hereby
approved, subject to conditions in Planning Commission Resolution No. 1699,
attached hereunto as Exhibit "D".
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 18th day of May , 1977, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the Cit~ Council
AYES: Meyers, Nellis, Frolich
NOES: Jackson, 0'Keefe
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
APPROVED:
/s/ Donald A. Frolich
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ATTEST:
/s/ Wm. E. Ryder
City Clerk
.
~ '
• . .
. /
, 11'',05~ .
OQ~~~ ~`N~ ~
QR
REa~
9 LAWN
i' . .
/ " .
1~ . .
~ ~ - PATIO
/ .
2d., /
,
~fdFA 25 TWO STORY .
?p~~~~ 9 ~ ~ / ~T
~
fyF
~ ONE STORY ~
9
. ,I`~6
,~6
PAT' I0
F~NC~ :
NOTE: SHADED TRIANGLES ARE PORTIONS OF ~ °
2Nn FLOOR FOR I~lHICH A VARIANCE '~~rG ~
IS SOUGHT, Fi~,9` :
. W
z
J
SCALE ~
INC - ~ o
~
a
\ , w
p~ 5~ 10' 20' 30' N
QQ~~~~ ~1NE
PLANNIi~G COMMISSION QR
CITY OF CllPERTINp ;
+ ~ .
APPLlCATION NO. ~ ~
. EXk1E1T~ /
BAXLEY C URT
P~C RESOLUTlON NO.
D'ATE
. ~
. ~ ,Z.
25'
REQ~D SET BACK
TWO STORY
I ___lo,.~i
REQ'D SET BACK
ONE STORYI
~
x ~
c~
~
w
_ ~
r
~ ~ -
0
H
, N
0
M ~ 3 ~
~ ~ : 20~
~ _ ~
~ ' W ~
}
?~.r ~ ~.Z..~
X~ ~ ~ J
E 1 ~
I W F-
~ z ~
O w
a
~x a / / / /~i~/~~/~. /
a (
~ ~
w
~ SCALE
0 ~ , , ,5 ~ i o ~ 2
14'
20'
PLANNItdG COMMISSI N :
~ CITY OF Cl1PE62YIN0 SECTION A- A
~ APPLICATlON NO. ~ ~ ~
~ ~
EXHIBIT
! P~C RESOLUYION NO.
~ DATE: ~ T~ •
I
. . ~
: . ~
2623 Cody Court
~ Santa Clara, CA 95051
• April 11, 1977
To: Director of Planning and Development ~
City of Cupertino
Subject: Application for a Variance
This letter is an application for a variance for City
Ordinance #780 regarding the minimum required setback',for
the rear yard of a two-story building. The mitigating cir-
cumstnaces in support of this application are enumerated
below: ,
1. The lot in question is a narrow, pie-shaped plat
of land, and as a result it is difficult to place
a standard rectangular building on it without
creating a number of small, unusable triangular
yards. This difficulty is comgounded by the,
narrowness of the lot, which is only 45' wide at
the required front setback of 25'. Thus, the
usable building site is necessarily at the rear
of the lot.
2. A two-story house is more energy efficient (since
there is less surface area of heat loss).
Further, the orientation of the proposed roof-line
will allow for the future installation of solar
' heating panels; the use of solar energy is planned
to preheat water within one year of completion,
and to heat the house itself within 3- 5 years.
3. This variance request is only for two small corner
areas with a total area of less than 45 square feet.
4. The minimum rear setback required for the sirigle-
story portion of the proposed house is 10' (since,
as per the ordinance, the back yard open area is
more than 20 times the lot's width). The miriimum
setback for the two-story portions is supposed to
be 25' in this case. However, looking at the
ing on the next page, note that the entire pro-
PLANNING COMMISSI~i of the proposed building falls well belqw a
CITY OF CUP~RI'IP901i drawn between the maximum height allowed for
a'ngle story (shown at the required setback) and
~ APPLICATION MO. th maximum height allowed for two stories (also
n at the required setback). This.means that
EXfiIBiT ~ vi all the proposed structure will actually be
~ of an infringement o~ the surroundings than
~ P~C RESOLUTION NO. th code allows. ,
~ DATE: ~ ~
I
, ~ , , 3
. ,
5. The ordinance requires that the rear setback for
the two-story portions be at least 20$ of tY~e lot
depth, or 20' whichever is greater. It also
states that the "depth" of a lot shall be the
length of the side property line, which is 126'
in this case.
~ ~
6_ ~
It appears that the ordinance is basically written
for rectangular lots, and thus may place an unusual
hardship on odd-shaped parcels. Note that if 26'
of depth were removed from the front of the property,
the proposed house (sited as shown) would meefi all
of the city's normal setback requirements, front and
rear. (20' front setback)
6. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances
applying to this land and proposed building which do
not generally apply to the land and buildings in this
area.
The granting of.this application is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of substantial property
rights of the petitioner.
The granting of this application under the circum-
stances of this particular case will not adversely
affect the health or safety of persons in the neigh-
borhood, nor will it be materially detrimental to
tne public welfare or injurious to property or im-
provements in said neighborhood.
If you need any additional information concerning this
variance application, please feel free to cqntact me at any
time.
Home phone: 408-248-3049
~ _ Work phone: 415-965-5446
Sincerely,
~~~s
Victor C. Stevens
• • ' 2-v-»
RESOLUTION N0. 1699
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ~
RECOMMEENDING DENIAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM
SECTION 9.4 OF OR.DINANCE 780 TO ALLOW REDUCTION OF
~ REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A TWO-STORY BUILDING
FROM TWENTY-FIVE (25) FEET TO TWENTY (20) FEET. ~ ~
APPLICANT: Victor C. Stevens
ADDRESS: 3623 Cody Ct., Santa Clara, California 95051
. SUBMITTED: April 8, 1977
LOCATION: Adjacent to and northerly of Baxley Ct. approximately 290 f t.
west of the intersection of Baxley Ct. and Linda Vista Dr.
(Lot 3, Tract 5561)
FURTHER FINDINGS: None
PASSED AND ADOPTED this llth day of May, 1977, 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 Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Markkula, Chairman Koenitzer
NAYS: None
_ ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None ~
APPROVED:
/s/ R. D. Koenitzer ~
R. D. Koenitzer, Chairman ~
Planning Commission '
ATTEST:
1.~ ~ ' _ . i
`
` ~
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
~ i
-z- xh ~ b ;
4
C i T Y 0 F C U P~E R T I N 0
City Hall, 10300 Torr-r Averue
Cupertino, California 95~14
Te~lephone; ;408j 252-4505
RESOLUTION OF THE P~ANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF,CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL QF A VARIANCE
WHEREAS the Planning Gommis~ion of the City of Cupertino re-
ceived an application for a VARIANCE, as stated on Page 2, and
WHEP,EAS the applicant has NOT met the burden of proof required
to suppart his said application, and .
WNEREAS the Planr~in~ Commission finds that the application does
NOT meet all of the following requirements:
i. That there are special conditions or exceptional character-
i st i cs i n the nature o.i~ tl~e property to be affected, or
~ that its location or its surroundings are ~uch as will per-
mit the Commi~sion t~r~ make a determination that a litera~
enfo~c~ment of the rdinance would result_in practical
difficulties or urn~Gessary i~ardships; and
2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the
preserva~tic~ ~nd enjoyme~~ of substantial property rights,
~nd
3. That the granti~g of the appiication will not materially
affect ~,dversely the health or safety of persons residing
or working in th~ r.zighborhood of the property which is
~ the s~bject of the apr~lication, and that the use of saicl
property in the manr~er w~i~h it is proposed to be used
will not be materially d~~rime~7ta1 ta the public ~~elfare
~ or injurioua t~ the val~~ c~f the property or improvements
lo~ated in s~id surro~andihos.
NOW, TH~ftEFC~RE, B~ IT k~~Oll6~D:
That af ter ~~re~F~, l eons ~ dPr~at: i~n ~f maps , fa~ts , exh i b i ts and
other evidence submitted in tl~is matter, the application for
the VARIANCE be, and the sam~ is, hereby NOY recommended for
approval to ~he City Council of th~ City of Cupertino; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: ~
That the findings q~oted above and on Page 2 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-