CC Resolution No. 5632 I ~ ~
~
' r '
.
! .
I RESOLUTION N0. 5632
I'! A RGSOLUTION OF THG CITY COUNCIL OF TIiE CL'fY OF CUPF.RTII~O
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PAT-Io9iALE, INC. (F1TW) FR019 SECTION
8.2 OF THE R1 (SIIJGLG-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING ORDI-
' NANCE TO PGR,?IT A REDUCTION IN Tliti REQUIRGD FRONT YARD
' StiTBACK DISTANCE FOR PARCEL C; LOCATED AT Tk;E SOUTkfERLY
TERMINUS OF SAN FELIPE ROAD AYPROXIMATELY 300 FT. SOUTH
OF ALCALDE ROAD IN AN R1-10 ZONING DISTRICT
11HEREAS, the applicant has me[ the burden of proof required to support
' his said application; and
' [~IiEREAS, the Planning Commission, af[er duly no[iced public hearings,
' has forwarded its recommendation to the Ci[y Council;
, NOiJ, THEREFORE, BE IT RCSOLVED [hat after careful consideration of maps,
facts, ex~iibi[s and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application
for [he Vartance (3-V-81) be and the same is hereby approved, subject to
' conditions in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2209, attached hereunto as
Exhibit "A".
Bti IT FURTHER RESOLVED that [he repor[ of findings attached hereto is
I ~pproved and adopted, and that the City Clerk be and is hereby directed to
notify [he parties affected by this decision.
' PASSCD AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Ci[y Council of [he City
of Cupertino this 18th day of tlay , 1981 by the following vote:
C'ote Memhers of the Citv Council
AYES: Gatto, Johnson, Plun~y, Sparks
~vOES: None
AIISENT: Rogers
ARSTAIN: None
APPROVCD:
. ~
Piayor, City of pertino
ATTF.ST:
___L!'j+s~~O
City Clerk
3-V-81
• •
RESOLSITION N0. 2209
OF THE PLANNINC COl1MISSION OF THE CITY OF CIJPERTINO
RECOPiMENDINC APPROVAL OF A VARIAP7CE TO REDUCE THE ^
t FRONT YARD SE'LBACK DISTANCE £OR A SINGLE-FAMILY
• IItdELLING ON PARCEL C OF APPLICATION 7-T4f-81 FROM
20 Ff. t0 VARIOUS DISTANCES WITN A MAXIMUM DEVIATION
'OF 7 FT.
APPLICANT: Pat-Whale, Inc.
ADDRESS: 22023 Baxley Court, Cupertino. California 95014
SGByITTED: April 16, 1981
LOCATION: Southerly terminus of San Felipe Road approximately 300 ft. south
of Alcalde Road
FINDI~GS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS:
' Approval is recommended subject to the findings as set forth un Page 1 and sub-
~I conciusions as set forth in the minutes of the Planning Commission neeting
'i o f ilay 11, 19 81.
SPECIFIC FIVDIVGS:
i The loss of land due [0 lung-[era servicinR diecrepancias and Cop~~tr~pnical constrainte
affecting road alignc~ents are exceptional and extraordinary cLrcumstances that m t
i
' design Elexibility fot the applicant's property.
CONDITIONS:
1-14. Standard Conditions to ttie ex[ent that they do not conflict with the
special conditions enumerated hetein. In the event a conflict does exist,
[he special condi[ions as enuo~erated herein shall apply.
15. ?he approval is based upon Exhibit A of Applica[ion 3-V-81 as may be amended
' by addi[ional conditions contained herein.
16. ?he normal side and rear setback requirements for Parcel C shall prevail.
:
PASSED AND ADOPTED this llth day of May. 1481, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Co~lssion of the Ci[y of Cuper[ino, State of California, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissionera Adams. Binneveg, Blaine, Chairman Claudy
tiAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
~BSENT: Commissioner Koenitzer
APPROVED:
Js/ John Cluudv
ATTEST: John Ciaudy. Chairman '
PlanninR Commission
Rnbert Cowan
Ass~stant Planning Dltector
_2_
• VARIANCE •
FINDINGS ~VYD SUBCONCLUSIONS
t '
, WHEN RECO"L~IENDI`IG THE GRA:lTING OF A VARIANCE THE PLANNING CO`CIISSION SHALL
I ' P41KE ALL OF THE FOLLOt1ING FINDINGS:
; 1. That there are special conditions oc excep[iunal characteristics
in the nature of the property to be aEfec[ed, ur [hat lts Luca-
tion or its surroundings are such as c~ill permit the Commission
to make a determination that a literal enforcement of the Ordinan~e
' would resulc in praccical difficulcies or unnecessary hardships;
li and
'i 2• That the granting oE the application is necessary Eur the preeerva-
tion and enjoyment oE substantial property rights; and
3. That [he hearings shuw that the granting of the application wili
! nut materially affect adversely the health ur safecy of persons
' residing or working in the neighbochood uf che propezty which is
I~ the subjece of the applicacion, and that the use of said prupe+-ry
i? [he manner in which it is propused ~o be used will nut be
materially de~rimental to the public welfare ur injuriuus to the
value of proper[y or impzovements lucated in said surroundings.
,
; ADDITIO:IACLY, ~S a PART OF THE CO`CtISSION'S ~1C'CION, SUBCONCLUSIOtiS IV
' SQPPORT OF TNE ,~BOVE FINDL:IGS SH~LL BE ?tADE ORaLLY, THUS BECO?tIVG a PART
OF THE RECORD, PRIOR TO FI;7~1I. VOTE ON THE ~PPLICATTO*7.
I WFiEN RECODL`SENDIyG THE DEVIAI. OF ~ VARIAb;CE, THE C0:^[ISSION SHAI.L .1DDRESS
~LL OF THE ABOVE FIVDIYC,S. IF THE COC~IISSLO:~ lS C'V9BLF i0 *L~KE OVE OR
`10RE OF THE FIYDI~GS, "fHE RECO}L^~:1DASIOY :[UST BE FOR DE"7IAI., S~,HCONCLUSIONS
' I~~ StiPPORT OF THE AHOVE FINDINCS SHAI.L 9E `!.1DE ORALLF, THCS 9ECO:fIVG A PART
, OF THE RECORD, PRIOR TO FI~AL VOTE ON THE ,~PPLICaTIO\.
I~i
I
I -
1-ZO'77