Let the law suits commence!! OTOF, Mr and Mrs Ozog will stamp their slippered feet because they don't want those kids playing in their backyards!!

Don't you know? Installing lights at Memorial Field will ruin the perfect lives of those residents who live near the field. Poor babies! Let there be lights!!

2352 GE citizens live right next door to Memorial Field?

And people that don't live any where near Memorial Field could care less.

I think that hits the nail on the head, Johner. If I live in the Glenbard South area, why in the world do I care about whether or not kiddies from G Dub have lights. I wouldn't. They were largely, if not completely ignored by supporters and the District. No pleas for voting yes, I don't believe anyone explained the situation to them. All I would take away as a South Sider is the perception that the District is spending money that won't benefit me . . . and perhaps cost me money. Hence, the large number of no votes. Strictly speculation on my part, of course.

Here's a suggestion for those who live near the field. If the district does, indeed, install lights, there are devices called blinds on your windows. Draw the blinds and get a life!

Perhaps Mr. Sandrolini should walk the talk and buy a home near the field. Better yet, draw your blinds and live the lifestyle you suggest. I don't live near the field but was against lighting it, in part to support those living near the field. I know I would appreciate my fellow villagers' support if someone were threatening the value of my home. Oh and Johner (nice screenname), you are incorrect.

It will be ticket heaven for GE when visiting teams park by the tracks and traffic hell for residents who drive by that already tricky area of Park and Crescent.. Oh yeah, that area wont be for the publics use either.(not mentioned in referendum)

They don't have to mention that it is not for public use in the referendum...because the school district has owned that property since 2000. It is not like it is owned by the Park District and suddenly is being turned over to the school. I had thought that the wording of the referendum was submitted by OFOT?

How is parking going to affected? One lax game is not going to add more issues than a play, concert, art show or a basketball game, all which take at night as well. Anyway the commuter lot is free after noon. Any one who bought by the high school, but is complaining about traffic is a fool.

The zoning on this property is CR.

Only open space uses and passive recreation areas shall be allowed by permitted use in this district. All buildings, structures and principal activity areas shall be allowed by Special Use only, unless specifically waived by the Building and Zoning Official upon review and approval of the Director of Planning and Development.

1. Agriculture, including incidental agricultural structures, but excluding livestock operations.
2. Open space, public park and playground.

The Village has no record of ever approving a Special Use on this property.

Read the code.
http://www.glenellyn.org/Planning/Documents/GE%20Zoning%20Code%20Complete.pdf

Did the Village ever formally answer D87's question submitted in an email in Summer 2011: "Don't we need to submit for approval of a Special Use permit?"

I believe the documents posted on the Village of Glen Ellyn web site in early February fully addressed the issue. The documents are not longer posted, but I'm sure the Village will post them again if someone requests the info. The Patch thread is:
http://glenellyn.patch.com/articles/village-trustees-approve-memorial-field-lights

Steve

I did not save the documents on the Glen Ellyn Village web site. As I recall they confirmed the correct zoning was establish in conjunction with the property transfer.

Stephen or Maria - Did you save a copy of the documents that were posted?

Steve

We went through this whole argument with Maria on the last thread. She stopped responding when the link was set up on the Village website with a copy of the Special Use permit from 2000. Now that it is no longer on the website, she is arguing that point again.
She is correct that no Special Use permit was granged in February. It was already granted in 2000. Here is an excerpt from the Daily Herald 1/23/2012:

Glenbard District 87 purchased Memorial Field from the Glen Ellyn Park District and received a special-use permit from the village of Glen Ellyn in 2000. Future lights were contemplated in the special-use permit, subject to the approval of a variance.

Here is a link to that article. http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120123/news/701239816/

kelly

On Sept 4, 2011: Attorney for the GE Park District to the Village:
“Can you send me a copy of the School District’s application for SPECIAL USE…for my review on behalf of the GE Park District?”

Nov 17, 2010: Village Planner: “... we are waiving any required SPECIAL USE Permit for Memorial Park?”

Architect for D87 Nov 23, 2010 to Village GE:
“Do we also need to obtain a SPECIAL USE Permit?”

Hi Maria-so are you saying that the Village is lying and that no special use permit was given back in 2000? The above points are all moot, if indeed, the special use permit that I read back in February (and the Daily Herald refers to) was given in 2000.

Unless my memory has faded, the documents posted by the village in in February from 2000 specifically addressed the special use permit.

Did anyone from OFOT review the documents posted in February? Do you have a copy? We can set this to rest if someone clearly told us why the agreemtns posted by the village are not relavent.

Maria - You have obviously done a lot of research on the issue. Did you review the documents posted in February? Is there some reason the special use permit langauge included was not valid?

Steve

Also, regarding the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Village of GE and D87 where the Village essentially agreed to abandon the "special use" category for schools - this IGA contemplated revising the Village zoning code such that "schools" would be permitted uses - not special uses - within RESIDENTIAL zoning districts. (R-Districts).

Indeed, the Village Zoning code was rtevised and now list "schools" as permitted uses in residential districts. However, at the time of this IGA between GE and D87, D87 did not own Memorial Park.

The Zoning Code still says that in the CR zoning district, schools are not permitted. I also do not think is it legal for one to enter into a land use agreement for "future" land - specifically, how does one enter into a land-use agreement on land that was not owned by the school district at the time of the agreement?

A classic zoning strategy is to attempt to conceal a controversial "change of use" with miscellaneous variance and departure requests on items like set backs, open space, building heights, etc. Another is to creep the use on the property without approvals and then claim the use is "existing."

Here is a link to Ordinance 4802.
It was never legally recorded on the property by filing it with the DuPage County Recorders Office.
Refer to Exhibit B for a pictorial of what was approved.

http://www.glenellyn.org/GE/Documents/ordinance%204802.PDF

These people complaining about noise and lights (which you can barely notice unless you're already obsessed with losing - lawyers, go figure) have a TRAIN RUNNING THRU THEIR BACKYARD, many time daily. So the happy sound of kids playing is intrusive and unbearable, but that train horn and rumble that shakes the foundation of the house is ok. They bought knowing a train could derail into their house. But those lights! THAT's what will drop their property value.