Reso 167 File No. 44-v-63
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 167
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received
the application of A. T. COOK & R. J. WILSON for a VARIANCE to allow
three buildings on one site; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to
support his said application.
NOW, THEREFOREi 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:"
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 notify
the parties affected by this decision.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Cup-
ertino, State of California, this 28th day of October, 1963, by the
® following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners : Adamo, Rampy, Small, Snyder, Frolich
NOES: Commissioners: Fitzgerald
ABSENT: Commissioners: Leonard
/s/ Donald Frolich
Chairman, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
/s/ Robert S. .Shook
Secretary, Planning Commission
-1-
File No. 44-V-63
REPORT: OF .FINDINGS.,
•
The application for a VARIANCE AN E on behalf of A T. COOK and R. J. WILSON
shows:
1. That there are special conditions or exceptional characteris-
tics in the nature of the property to be affected or that it' s idea-
tion, 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 pre-
servation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and .
3. That the granting of the application will not materially .af af-
fect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in
the neighborhood of the property which is the subject of the applica-
tion, and that the use of said property in the manner which it is pro-
posed to be used will not be materially detrimental to the public wel-
fare or injurious to the value of property or improvements located in
said surroundings.
•
-2-