My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf10-017
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
2010
>
pf10-017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2014 1:19:06 PM
Creation date
7/17/2013 9:28:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
10-017
Planning Files - Type
Planning-Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
128
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
Bryan Lloyd <br />From: Margaret Driscoll <br />Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 9:27 AM <br />To: Pat Trudgeon; Bryan Lloyd <br />Subject: FW: Salay/North Como Community Gardens <br />FYI... I'll make copies for the Council meeting. <br />From: MARILYN SALAY [mailto:msalay@q.com] <br />Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 5:05 PM <br />To: Craig Klausing; *RVCouncil <br />Subject: Salay/NOrth Como Community Gardens <br />I am contacting you indicating my support for the RCA reply letter Mr. Leiendecker has <br />submitted and to express support to require a CUP for the proposed gardens on the North Como <br />property. <br />I am an homeowner on Chatsworth St. across from the church. Was raised here as a child and <br />love the neighbors as they are great people and law abiding citizens. <br />Our neighborhood is a well-populated, residential area and the proposed "public" gardens <br />would have a significant, direct impact on the neighborhood at large. All the 64 plus adult <br />signatures are indicative of this fact and to suggest impact is low or minimal is a real <br />disservice to us residents and taxpayers. To be frank it is rather offensive and a slap in <br />the face as if to say we cannot dissern what is low or moderate?? I would expect higher <br />standards in decision- making than what I have witnessed in this whole process both from the <br />church and city administration. <br />These public gardens are indeed--public. <br />A. Church is collecting a fee of $25 per plot <br />B. The gardens are open to anyone, living anywhere and not restricted to their <br />congregation or <br />church members. <br />C. The church is entering into a written agreement with their "gardeners" which by <br />nature is a <br />return <br />business venture since a fee is also involved. I pay this--I obtain this in <br />.� i —� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.