Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 3 · column 1 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
(Continued from Page 1 ) property value, he maintained.
Baumgardner questioned whether it was reasonable to stipulate that the range be designed to preclude the escape of a bullet intentionally fired. “That’s from the firing line only,” Miller said. He noted that experts from the National Rifle Association who testified before the planning commission had indicated that the requirement was not unreasonable. “The only unreasonable thing. . .is to have a range where the rounds could escape,” Miller maintained.
Rezone
Supervisor Latham proposed that the ranges be allowed in business or commercial districts rather than in agricultural zones.
“I’d be afraid to do that,” responded Commissioner Miller. "If we rezoned property to commercial or industrial with the idea of allowing a firing range and then the range folds, the land is still zoned commercial."
He maintained that it would be wiser to allow ranges as a special permitted use on agricultural land. Then if the range goes out of business, the property remains in agricultural zoning, he added.
Commissioner Supervisor Charles Estes agreed that an agricultural area “out away from everything else” is a more suitable location for a shooting range than developed, commercially zoned property.
After hearing Krebser’s argument regarding effect of a shooting range on adjacent property values and latham's point that setback distance will reduce the safety hazard posed by range users carrying weapons in and out of the facility. Miller withdrew his objection to the 500 foot distance regulation.
“For flexibility, you could say 500 feet or as otherwise established by condition of the board,” suggested McNear.
Baumgardner volunteered to work on the wording changes suggested by the
88.4%