Loading...
Reso 143 File No. 35-:V 63 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 143 III WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received the application of Richard Gonzales for a VARIANCE for a rear yard of 111 where ordinance requires 202 , Lot 3, Tract 1946, Pringlewood ; and WHEREAS, the applicant has, XXgxKUt . met the burden of proof re- quired 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 VARIANCE be, ni.Exbu. , and the same is, $ , hereby recommended for approval to the City Council of the City of Cupertino for appropriate action, xub$nxk text uextErmmxamdxemnd/#/m zwh.ich.zavezatta hmdxh.:v:tozandzmadexaxpavk hiangmfxamzExhadtzRA34 BE IT FURTHER RES OLVED: ® That the report of findings attached hereto are approved and adopted; and that the Secretary be, and is hereby, directed to notify the parties affected by this decision. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Cupert _i._ State of California, this 22 day of July , 19 , by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Fitzgerald, Leonard, Small, Snyder, Frolich NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy /s/ Donald Frolich Chairman of the Planning Comm. ATTEST: /s/ Robert S. Shook Secretary of the Planning Commission - 1 - - - File No , 35-V-63 REPORT OF FINDINGS Tre application for a VARIANCE on behalf of • Richard Gonzales shows: ti -- to That •there are special conditions or exceptional characte.rist:i.cs in the nature of the property to be affected or that it s location, or it ' s surroundings are such as will permit the Commission to make a deter- mination 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 pre- servation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; anc: 3. 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, tile, use, of_ said, `property. in the, manner which. it is proposed to be used will not be materially detrimental to the pu,o_lic; welfare or in- jurious to the value of property or improvements located in said surr- oundings. • • • •