3. Continuity of zoning promotes legislative policy that stable land use is beneficial to public. Colonial Investment Co. v. City of Leawood, 7 Kan. App. 2d 660, 665, 646 P.2d 1149 (1982).
4. Cited; proper statute to challenge city ordinance rezoning property, timeliness of notice of appeal, effective date of ordinance examined. Davis v. City of Leavenworth, 243 Kan. 522, 527, 759 P.2d 113 (1988).
City of Salina v. Jaggers, 612 P.2d 618 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 7ד19-2905 were repealed by implication when the legislature enacted K.S.A. 12-705a and 12-705b in 1965.” The resolution of that issue will shed light on the statutory procedure to be followed with respect to subdivision regulation within the three-mile unincorporated area…”
Crumbaker v. Hunt Midwest Mining, Inc., 69 P.3d 601 (Kan. 2003). “See also K.S.A. 12-705a, 12-706a. “Although these statutes do not deal directly with the issue of zoning, they do indicate the legislature’s underlying policy that stable land uses are beneficial to *879 the public welfare and that such stability is enhanced by continuity of…”
Colonial Inv. Co. v. City of Leawood, 646 P.2d 1149 (Kan. Ct. App. 1982). “See also K.S.A. 12-705a, 12-706a. Although these statutes do not deal directly with the issue of zoning, they do indicate the legislature’s underlying policy that stable land uses are beneficial to the public welfare and that such stability is enhanced by continuity of zoning.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.