Reso 154 File No. 37-V-63
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 154
WHEREAS,, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino re-
ceived the application of The Valley Green Company for a VARIANCE
to .the Subdivision Ordinance to allow monolithic sidewalks where or-
dinance ,requires standard separated sidewalks; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required 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 VAR-
IANCE be, and the same is , hereby recommended for approval to the City
Council of the City of Cupertino for appropriate action, subject to
the terms and conditions which are attached hereto and made a part
hereof as Exhibit "A"..
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the report of findings attached hereto are approved and
adopted, and that the Secretary be, and is hereby, directed to noti-
fy the parties affected by this decision.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Cupertino, State of California, this 9th day of September, 1963, by
the following roll call vote:
® AYES: Commissioners:' Adamo, Fitzgerald, Rampy, Small, Snyder,
Frolich
NOES:' Commissioners: None'
ABSENT: Commissioners: Leonard
/s/ Donald Frolich
Chairman.; Planning Commission
ATTEST:
/s/ Robert S. Shook
Secretary, Planning Commission
File No.. 37-V-63
REPORT OF FINDINGS
The Application for a VARIANCE on behalf of The Valley Green Com-
pany shows:
1. That there are special conditions or exceptional character-
istics 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 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
preservation and enjoyment of. substantial property rights; and
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 ap-
plication, and that the use of said property in the manner which it
is proposed to be used will not be materially detrimental to the pub-
lic welfare or injurious . to the value of property or improvements
located in said surroundings.