Kearney planning commission recommends denying rezoning request for Eastbrook corner lot

The Kearney City Planning Commission on Wednesday recommended denying a request to rezone a vacant lot in the Eastbrook subdivision from R-1 (urban single-family) to R-1D (residential duplex), following a public hearing in which neighbors said the change would conflict with the neighborhood’s restrictive covenants and increase traffic and safety risks.

The applicant, Stuart Hoffman of Hoffman Builds, asked the commission to rezone Lot 1, Block 1, Eastbrook (identified in the application as 5715 Avenue R) so he could build a duplex and lower building costs. “Duplexes is an option to reduce building costs,” Hoffman told commissioners, saying he planned the units primarily as rentals.

The commission’s recommendation to deny the rezoning was based on concerns raised during the hearing and staff analysis. The item now moves to the Kearney City Council for final consideration at its Aug. 12 meeting.

Why it matters: The property is the last undeveloped lot in Eastbrook and—residents said—was developed and marketed under single-family expectations. Neighbors and the homeowners association president said the subdivision’s restrictive covenants, filed in February 2007, limit the lot to single-family dwellings and that changing the zoning would force them to consider costly legal action to enforce the covenants.

During the hearing, City Attorney Michael Tice briefed the commission on the legal difference between zoning and private covenants: “Restrictive covenants are not enforced by the city of Kearney,” Tice said, and added that covenants are a private contract of record that homeowners or the homeowners association would have to enforce separately in court. He also said a property owner may apply for rezoning but is not entitled to it as a matter of right.

Neighbors detailed safety and neighborhood-character concerns. Brent Kreitzer, president of the Eastbrook Homeowners Association, said the covenants limit rentals so that a unit cannot be leased to multiple unrelated occupants and warned that pursuing litigation would be an expense for the HOA. “We can’t afford to pursue legal action,” Kreitzer said, describing the subdivision’s roughly 265 lots and noting HOA dues of about $100 per year.

Other nearby residents raised traffic and setback issues specific to the corner lot. Tammy Bridal, who said she lives directly west of the vacant lot and serves on the HOA board, called the request “spot zoning” and said the lot is “surrounded by all single-family homes.” She also cited limited sightlines and frequent pedestrian activity near the corner.

Staff noted the property has remained vacant since it was platted in February 2006 and that the proposed R-1D zoning is consistent with the city’s land-use categories that allow single-family or duplex units. Staff’s report said the rezoning would be consistent with the 2016 comprehensive plan and the surrounding pattern of some multifamily zoning nearby but acknowledged that adjacent property owners may oppose the change because the lot has been zoned single-family for nearly 19 years.

Commission discussion emphasized the difference between the planning recommendation and final city action, and several commissioners urged that better pre-application communication with neighbors can reduce conflicts. After public comment and deliberation, a motion to deny the rezoning passed; commissioners noted the recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for a final decision.

The commission also reminded applicants and commissioners that restrictive covenants are recorded with the register of deeds and that purchasers are deemed to have notice of recorded covenants.

Votes at a glance: The Planning Commission moved and seconded a motion to deny rezoning request 2025-12. The motion to deny carried and the commission will forward its recommendation of denial to the Kearney City Council, which will consider the application at its Aug. 12 meeting at 5:30 p.m. in the same chambers.

What’s next: The City Council will hold the final public hearing and vote on the rezoning request. If the council approves a zoning change despite the covenants, the homeowners association could pursue civil enforcement of its recorded covenants in court, the city attorney said.