CC_Minutes_2010_0524 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

217 Minn. 483, 497, 14 N. W.2d 913, 921 (1944)(corporate bylaws have the same force and effect as provisions of a corporation's charter or articles of incorporation and must be obeyed by the corporation and its directors, officers, and shareholders.). Be this as it may, the City Council may not have too much "skin in the game," so-to- speak, from an enforcement standpoint anyway. The fact that all agree that NCPC's planned activity is substantially a public endeavor makes enforcement rather unnecessary anyway. To be sure, whether the proposed "community garden" strives to assist the immigrant population, the community gardeners on the Roseville waiting list,4 or the various food shelves,s there can be no doubt remaining that the purpose of NCPC's proposed land use activity is very public in its nature and design. The City itself admits this through its promotion of NCPC's planned "community garden" to the public at large on the city website. (See RCA Attachment D, p. 6-14)(PDF, 85-93). Clearly, the fact that the City was promoting the activity to the general public is not new evidence to the City.6 The City advertisement even noted that the community garden was going to be "large." (Id.) This corresponds to NCPC's admission that the "community garden" will now start with 15-18 plots and will expand in future years. (RCA Attachment C, p2 (PDF, p. 41)(Kim Spear May l 9, 2010 letter to Bill Malinen).~ The planning division also now admits that "'[c]ommunity gardening' would seem apt to fit the description of an essentially-public activity." (RCA, p. 6, ¶ 5.2(e).) (3) THE PLANNING DIVISION ADMITS THAT THE ZONING CODES CAN REGULATE COMMUNITY GARDEN ACTIVITIES. The RCA states that: ...Euclidean (i.e., use-based) zoning codes like Roseville's are often intended and interpreted to prohibit uses which are not included in a list of uses associated with a given zoning district. This convention serves to obviate the question of whether, say, a metal foundry may be established on an R-1 property; a metal foundry is not in the list of allowed uses and, consequently, would not be permitted. (RCA, p. 2, ¶ 4.1.) Following the planning division's reasoning, a "community garden" does not appear on the R1 list of permitted activities, so it must be prohibited much like a metal foundry would be. The planning division even admits that: "The R1 district is designed to be the most restrictive of the residential districts." (Id., p. 3, ¶ 4.3.)(quoting the Purpose Statement of the R1 Zoning District). ' RCA Attachment C, p.2 (PDF, p. 41)(Kim Spear May 19, 2010 letter to Bill Malinen). 41d. (stating that "We are delighted that our community garden will shorten the waiting list of Roseville residents wanting community garden plots.") s Id. 6 See RCA, p. 1, ¶ 2.l (stating that the initial communication between NCPC and the city staff began in mid- to late March.). Its original plan, as presented to the planning division, began with 26 plots. RCA Attachment A, p. 21 (PDF, p. 21). 3