Laserfiche WebLink
Y3 41 <br /> February P, 1070 <br /> The <br /> co were p Councilman gu. 10:00 <br /> l <br /> L'ehruar'y 18, 970 d' n roll as found that l <br /> h <br /> to the meeting held February seconded <br /> approvedbe Callaghan that the til <br /> oLD BUSINESSBrUSt from <br /> denialPlanning Commission of rezone request. <br /> HEARING Frank Bennett,Planning d said the the Everettt '!I <br /> DR.WILLIAM was approximately 7.8 acres south of 41st Street and east of BROST said Dr.Brust had appeared before the Planning Commission in Colby. He <br /> er <br /> REZONE APPEA1. of 1168 requesting a rezone <br /> fr aof 11tarea. <br /> A notice <br /> ra <br /> of hearing was published and P r <br /> area. The Planning Commission after <br /> stimony a after a <br /> ons,d n d request£or ne an <br /> izing and evaluating said td <br /> made the follow g finding of facts: <br /> multiple1. There are a total of eight structures <br /> and a nursing home 1 multiple <br /> family zoned <br /> area in whichthe su se property m <br /> is tea. <br /> 2. The past and present development of the R-4 zoned area <br /> is within the scope of the existing multiplm family <br /> housesregulations. In the past few years there have been four <br /> new apartment <br /> and r ingo_a nursing uhome. <br /> d enlargement <br /> 3. The established land use pattern for the <br /> g consisting <br /> peof rmitted uses on multiple z resi- <br /> dential ... <br /> rant. ilea ofaml <br /> 4. <br /> aboundaries that separate the <br /> zoned area ea <br /> by <br /> nopertnmey,trb R 1 major dreet to the north. Long <br /> 'anlitltmer <br /> tt b ni f 9 ] ylimited <br /> fE b 1?�'_ep along Rucker contemsatura a <br /> srnge20 <br /> fm'm c. feeilpa <br /> development,merely two,Permitted tion buts <br /> the land on the south. • <br /> tv.' 5. The area is in close proximity with business and commer- <br /> cial areas of the caty. Tne central business core <br /> ellTsgoaqcity is within one mile of the s property. of the <br /> -iY�tl.[2 ,6 There have been n s presented b <br /> y the <br /> applicant as to,ey <br /> .8011.8.0sstl 6d.hart r accordWith the existiinghe pzone erte bonnsig an in <br /> -d" 7 The argument that because <br /> north side <br /> Bt Ls zoned dor <br /> ss. The property south of <br /> w_ 4Strdet should be in the same category is not con- <br /> 1st ed.. limited <br /> access valid <br /> oro he two parcels f with <br /> a <br /> rea <br /> and the fact thaminimum zoned business strap on the <br /> • service area for freewaY users <br /> .Vd councilman Michelson asked mr. <br /> t if the property owners en the <br /> •Vt-Planning area could protest tmeeting he protesting this. Mr.Bennett said the <br /> inorth side of 41st Street was antended for a highway <br /> tso <br /> sor _. p could Planning Comm:seen p h.. <br /> was <br /> Qtly l 9'. arks t dingss f Tting. Lou Bell,attorney for Br. ' <br /> rn j ,e �� the eUB180t prop yty both sides of Rucker were zoned <br />