Laserfiche WebLink
BOARDMAN, SUHR, CURRY & FIELD <br /> Ms. Shary Bisgard <br /> May 17, 1989 <br /> Page 3 <br /> one must distinguish between governmental uses and developed, <br /> large area recreational uses identified in subsections <br /> 10. 10 (1) (a) and (2) (b) . <br /> I ask that the decision on the conditional use permit <br /> specify, pursuant to section 10.255 (2) (i) , that if the <br /> conditional use is granted in this A-1 district in which this <br /> site is located, that it be confined to "governmental uses" only, <br /> and that the uses specified in RE-1, either as permitted or <br /> conditional uses, that are distinctly identified as separate from <br /> "governmental uses, " shall not be permitted without further <br /> application to the Committee in accordance with the requirements <br /> of Section 10. 10. <br /> In its solicitation of a "Yes" vote to approve the site, the <br /> official sample ballot included a lengthy statement of the <br /> reasons why the site would be advantageous. However, those <br /> materials, like the ballot itself, did not state a position on <br /> the question of lights. The Town's solicitation (copy enclosed) <br /> also seemed to concede, in the following passage, that further <br /> hearing and an additional conditional use permit from the County <br /> would be necessary for the addition of lights to the site: <br /> WHAT ABOUT RECREATIONAL LIGHTING? <br /> While there are good arguments both for and against <br /> recreational lighting, the current plan does not show <br /> lights. We feel that this issue should not be a <br /> pivotal one that determines whether or not a park is <br /> built but rather how a park is USED. A conditional use <br /> permit is required by the County. This process will <br /> require that adequate public hearings be held. What- <br /> ever the outcome, the Parks and Recreation Commission <br /> and Town Board will be responsible for regulating use <br /> and correcting problems if any arise. (Emphasis added) <br /> Therefore, the question of site approval as presented to the <br /> townspeople expressly represented that the question of lights was <br /> not being determined by the Town meeting vote, and that further <br /> hearings and County action would be needed in order to add lights <br /> to the site. The restriction which I request above, requiring <br /> that there be such further County action before lights be <br /> considered an authorized use at the site, is consistent with the <br />