HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESO 5177•
...
• •
RESOLUTION NO, 5177
RESOLUTION OF THE COIJ!tCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
APPROVING A MISCELLANEOUS DIVISION OF LAND FOR
PROPERTY COMM·1~~LY KNOWN AS 3840 MAY COURT, 3850 MAY
COURT, k~D 3315 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD IN THE CITY OF
PALO ALTO AND G&\NTING EXCEPTIONS TO SECTION 21.20.110
AND St:CTION 21.32.0SO(b) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE,
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the applicant, Mr. Dennis Kobza, applied for a
Miscellaneous Divi~ion of Land into three lots, commonly known
as 3840 May Court, 3850 May Court, and 3815 Middlefield Road,
as shown on the map attached h~ret·o, marked EXHIBIT A and by
reference incorporated herein as t_:hough fully set forth; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning refused to approve said
application on the basis that Parcel "C" as shown on said map
was less than 100' in average depth as required by Section
21.20.110 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code for residential lots
on a curved or cul-de-sac street (of which May Court is both);
and
~JHEREAS, p~rsuant to Section 21.28.010 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code, the applicant thereupon applied for a conditional
exc~ptirn to Section 21. 20 .110 for said parcel "C"; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 1975, the matter was heard by the
Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto, and the Planning
Commission, in lieu of the requested conditional exception and
with the assent of the ~pplicant, has recollliaended that the City
Council authorize two conditional exceptions for said property
as follows:
1. With respect to Parcel "An, an exception to Section
21.20.110 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to allow this
lot to have a 95' depth rather than the 100' depth required
by Section 21.20.110; and
2. With respect to Parcel "B", an exception to Section
21.32.0SO(b) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to allow this
rear lot to have an area of 9,547 square feet rather than
an area of 9,600 square feet as required by the R-l-B-8
zoning of the property in conjunction with the 20% additional
area requirement of Section 21.32.050 for a rear lot;
said exceptions being necessitated by the shifting of the lot lines
from the lines proposed originally by the applicant (shown as dashed
lines on said map) to the lines recotmnended by the Planni«g
CoJllliliss ion (shmm as solid lines on said map); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings
in conjunction with the recommendation of approval:
1. Whereas the neighborhood in which the subject property
is located is overdeveloped with non-residential uses due,
in part, by available excessively. large parcels, division
of the subject property as proposed is necessary to encourage
residential development;
2. The curvature of May Court is a special condition affecting
the property;
-l -
•••
3. The exceptions are necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner;
4. Granting the exceptions will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the district; and ·
5. The project is exempt from the requirement for an
environmental impact assessment; and
WHEREAS, it appears that the granting of said exceptions
will secure substantially the objectives of the regulations of
Section 21.20.110 and 21.32.0SO(b) and the public health, safety,
convenience, and general welfare will be protected as required
by Section 21.28.020 of tae Palo Alto Municipal Code;
NOW. THEREFORE. the Council of the City of Palo Alto does
RESOLVE as follows:·
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 21.28.040 of the Palo Alto
M,.micipal Code! the Council hereby ~pproves the tetbtative map
with· the exceptions to Section 21.20.110 and Section 21.32.0SO(b)
as recommended by the Planning Commission, subject to the condition
that the access to Parcel "B" shall have a paved way not less than
12' in width constructed to support 33,000 pounds and with no
overhead obstruction lower than 13'.
.§._ECTION 2. The Council hereby finds that:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting
the property.
2. The exceptions are necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner.
3. The granting of these exceptions will not be detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to other propertY. in the
territory in which the property is situated.
SECTION 3. The Council hereby finds that this project
qualifies for a categorical exemption from the requirements for
an environmental assessment.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: December 8, 1975
AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Carey, Clay, Comstock, Eyerly, Norton, Sher,
Witherspoon
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINING: None
APPROVED: ~£?J.,oh ~
• -,
~ ·.
: .. ~f..-.
···:
.
I I
&
DASI-fee> \.-l~EC:, -0Rt41N"L, PROPOSAt...
SOl..10 L.lWES -Pl..ANN\N(4 'OMM14il~ION
-
--·-.
\
\
\ \_
' \
\
' ;
I \ ! \
RE'GOMMENDATIOWl \
\ ! L_J
E~htbtf-A
.. · . .,,,
-r
,,
' -
t-~
,~--
.: .. :~
·.::'-·
~-.. -·
--
'• ·.·: ~-'.-
. ..~. ........ . -.-·~
':~<~-~ ' -·~1
_',::~:~1
·~~
.·•. ·-~· '/
-~