Laserfiche WebLink
(RCA Attachment C, p.39; PDF, p.78.) Anytime this planning committee meets it exceeds <br />the low impact limitation of 10, and no more than 15 parking spaces. The planning division's <br />claim that the "community garden" is not a commercial venture is also disingenuous. The <br />mere fact that NCPC requires an agreement involving abargained-for exchange of the right <br />to use its land dispels any notion that the activity does not involve the contracting with <br />persons in the community to provide services in conjunction with the identified public <br />purpose on the subject land. <br />In sum, it is patently obvious that the planned community garden; because it <br />contemplates that the contracting "gardener;" along with immediate family members, can be <br />involved in the public activity; fails to satisfy the "]ow impact" requirements of the City <br />Code. (RCA Attachment B, p.3; PDF, p.38)(stating that all five requirements must be met in <br />order to be deemed "low impact" under the City Code). The planned land use activity is <br />clearly a moderate impact quasi-public use of the land. The City of Roseville's placement of <br />its "community garden" at Oasis Park; in an area tucked away from significant exposure to <br />single family homes on land zoned POS; certainly attests to this fact. <br />(6) CONCLUSION. <br />As one of the 64 Appellants to the appeal of the planning division's administrative <br />determination, I respectfully request; for the reasons cited above; that the City Council <br />reverse the planning division and require that NCPC obtain a conditional use permit. <br />With Respect, <br />/s/ Larry Leiendecker <br />983 Larpenteur Ave W. <br />7 <br />