Editor, The Smithfield Times:

A few weeks ago I learned that the Smithfield Town Council was considering honoring an individual by the placing of plaques on the Windsor Castle Park trails. 

Mr. Joseph Luter III built the park with the intention of providing a passive park for the benefit of the town of Smithfield. Among all the things in the park, the walking trails were paramount in his wishes for what the park should be. 

Subsequently, I made a telephone call to the mayor and spoke to two council members about my concerns. Each person acknowledged my thoughts would be brought to the Town Council meeting for discussion. As it turned out, the Town Council voted unanimously to continue with its plan.

I have no grievance with the naming after an individual for his accomplishments; however, naming the Windsor Castle Park trails and placing plaques is not consistent with the purpose of the passive park Windsor Castle was intended to be or the desires of Joseph Luter. 

A passive park is intended to remain as is, a predominately natural, scenic, open place for the protection of a natural habitat, watershed resources and the environmental system. Passive recreation refers to low-impact recreation uses where construction of anything is limited to the improvement that provides safe access and essential support functions. Trail uses such as bird watching, hiking, picnicking and nature walks all fit the definition of a passive park.

To name anything in the park for anyone but Joseph Luter III is a dishonor to Mr. Luter and Smithfield, and a disgrace to the Town Council. The town is blessed to have such a generous benefactor. Smithfield has been given a gem of a park. Please leave the park the way it was

intended to be.

Thank you to all who have expressed their concern about Windsor Castle Park and the

process the Town Council used to bring about its decision.

 

Lawrence Pitt

Smithfield