My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/04/2000
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/04/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:21:27 AM
Creation date
9/8/2003 3:39:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
01/04/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
184
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 8 -- November 25, 1999 <br /> <br />z.g. <br /> <br /> There were 28 rezonings in the area and a trend towards higher density use. <br />Construction of the development would not adversely affect the real estate <br />values of nearby residential properties, and the property was not capable of <br />development as then zoned. Nearby, an apartment building, a center for troubled <br />teenagers, and a nine-story condominium had been built. It was reasonable to <br />believe the character of the neighborhood had changed. <br /> When deciding public need, the council could consider information ob- <br />tained at the hearing, its own common knowledge, and its familiarity with the <br />area. Columbia stated there were only six facilities in the area that offered this <br />type of living for the elderly and only two were in the city proper. As then <br />zoned, the property produced no tax revenue. Rezoning the property would <br />greatly increase the tax revenue, and this increase should also be considered. <br /> Preserving an ex/sting residential area was a valid city goal. An amend- <br />ment to a zoning ordinance was not meant to be easy or otherwise the ordi- <br />nance would be a meaningless scrap.0f paper. Even so, a decision by a local <br />government board was presumed valid, and the burden was upon the person <br />seeking to set it aside to show it was arbitrary and unreasonable. But, it was <br />within the court's power to reverse a rezoning ordinance adopted on insuffi- <br />cient proof. <br /> In the present case, however, substantial evidence was presented by both <br />sides. Thus, the decision must be said to be at least fairly debatable, which was <br />beyond the court's authority to overturn. <br />Citation: Fondren North Renaissance v. City of Jackson, Supreme Court of <br />Mississippi, No. 1998-CA-OISJ5-SCT (1999). <br />see also: Curriev. Ryan, 243 So. 2d 48 (1970). <br />see also: Saunders v. City of Jackson, 511 So.2d 902 (1987). <br /> <br /> Zoning Bulletin <br />To order Zoning Bulletin, call (800) 229-2084, or complete and return this <br />form to Quinlan Publishing Group, 23 Drydock Ave., Boston, MA 02210-2387, <br />or fax (800) 539-8839. <br /> $99 (plus $5.81 s&h)-- 1 year (24 issues) <br /> <br /> El New subscription El Payment enclosed <br /> El Renewal subscription El Bill me ZBN9 <br /> <br />Name <br /> <br />Organization <br /> <br />Address <br /> <br />City State <br />Phone Fax <br />'Email <br /> <br />Zip <br /> <br />/?2 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.