CC_Minutes_2010_0524 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

clearly there are ~.~o special rules allowing churches to engage in activities that single family homeowners cannot. Beyond this is the clear understanding now that the proposed land use of a "community garden" can indeed be regulated through a conditional use permit. If not by the absence of the use from the R1 district list of uses (see supra text at 3-4), then by the public use provisions of Ordinance section 1004.02. Here, the City Code specifically regulates activities that are quasi-public and have a moderate impact on the surrounding neighborhood: "moderate impact quasi-public use." There is no dispute that NCPC is a private entity and that any public use of its land would qualify under the applicable definition of "quasi-public.i13 Further, there can be no remaining dispute that the "community garden" activity is public in its services rendered. (See RCA Attachment C, p2; PDF, p. 41)(Kim Spear May 19, 2010 letter to Bill Malinen stating that the intention of the "community garden" is to satisfy the needs of the immigrant population, the community gardeners on the Roseville waiting list, and various food shelves). 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).) As for whether the impact of the activity is "low" or "moderate," any question in this regard is answered by the fact that NCPC now plans for 15-18 plots initially and will expand in future years. (RCA Attachment C, p2 (PDF, p. 41)(Kim Spear May 19, 2010 letter to Bill Malinen). The puzzling contention that the proposed activity will be "low impact;" as in less than 10 employees requiring no more than 15 parking spaces; is dispelled by the fact that 64 Appellants in the affected neighborhood say otherwise. Indeed, the Appellants' contention that the planned activity qualifies as "moderate impact" is supported by the fact that we all can count. Fifteen to eighteen plots obviously contemplates family, friends and guests of the leaseholder of each plot. (See RCA Attachment C, p23; PDF, p. 62)(example gardener agreement.) Thus, each plot contemplates multiple persons that can expand from 18 upwards to 50 persons initially involved. This will grow larger due to NCPC's intention for future expansion. Even a "community garden" involving as few as 5 plots can involve more than ] 0 persons when considering that it is not just one person per plot that is involved with the land use activity. Additionally, the planning division's attempt to distinguish between W2 employees and volunteers is without merit. It cannot be ignored that the proposed "community garden" is being managea by the church and its employees, which by themselves number greater than ten. Just the persons (employees and volunteers) identified as the "community garden" planning committee total nineteen: Planning Committee: Kim Spear Sue Rickers Gavin Watt Jym Hubbell Carolyn Peterson Heather Good Charlie Good Darby Laing Eric Brandsness Michael Wilson Ordeen Finkelson Dorothy Finkelson Jim Amey Rita Amey Dan Graham Justin Miller Conrad Miller Dawn Miller Carole Ruct is "A quasi-public use is any use which is essentially public as in its services rendered, although it is under private control or ownership." Ord. § 1002.02.