DCPCUP-0000-00715 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

February 27, 1989 Dane County Agriculture, Environment & Land Records Committee City-County Building 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Madison, Wisconsin 53709 Re: Town of Cottage Grove C.U.P. 463 & 715 Recycling Site Dear Committee Members: I am writing to summarize as clearly and concisely as possible some of the reasons why your committee should deny the C.U.P. which has been requested by the Chairman of the Town of Cottage Grove. 1. You have not received a legal request from the Town. You have only received a letter of request from the Town Chairman and you received from us at the Public Hearing very clear documentation that the letter was fradulent and not authorized by Town Board action. I don't fault your committee or staff for originally accepting the letter at face value, however, after reviewing the uncontested evidence we have given you that the application was illegal, it seems obvious that you should negate the application and drop this item from your agenda. The Town Chairmans action in this matter has already been discussed with the District Attorneys Office and this may have serious implication of its own. 2. When the original 3 year C.U.P. was issued in 1986, one of the conditions was that the Town install landscape screening around the operation by the Fall of 1986. The Town has not only refused to comply with the condition but has refused to even consider or attempt any compliance. Mr. Skaar has argued that the Town had bad luck planting 2,000 6" red pine seedlings; This wasn't bad luck, but it was bad planning. All experts from the DNR and the University say that this was about the poorest choice available and was doomed from the start. The logical and legal interpretation of the screening condition was not for 2,000 6 inch trees but for 50 6 foot conifer type trees that would provide effective screening at that time and not 10 years later. Mr. Skaar argued at the public hearing that it was impossible to plant trees on a former landfill site. Even if this was true, it was something he was supposedly told 2i years after he refused to do the screening, so what would have been his excuse for the 2i years before that? To refute this argument we consulted several experts on the matter and their opinions as mentioned below all contradict Mr. Skaars statements on trees and plantings and also indicate guidelines for the proper siting and operation of a successful recycle operation. I will be at your meeting on 2/28/89 and because I and others are continuing to gather information on this subject I may have further developments to report to you at that time. In any event I will be available to repond to any questions you may have at that time. Sincerel , r Ri ( in-Coage Grove