The Observer recently likened the proposed commercial horse boarding Home Occupation Ordinance (HOO) Amendment to a square peg in a round hole. We’ve since come to the conclusion that it’s not just our opinion, it’s a fact.
That editorial prompted a resident to survey five “equine friendly” villages similar in nature and character to Barrington Hills for information on how their village codes address horse boarding. That resident has forwarded their findings to The Observer, and the results are eye opening.
Based on the regulations in Bull Valley, Homer Glen, Mettawa, Wadsworth and Wayne, if our Village approves the commercial horse boarding language contained in the HOO amendment as drafted, Barrington Hills will be the only community that:
- Considers horse boarding a home occupation
- Requires no special use permit for boarding
- Has no limits beyond total FAR for stable size, and
- Has no limit of horses allowed on residential properties
The comparison of “equine friendly” village codes can be viewed by clicking here. We urge all residents to read and share this comparison. Then, consider that to what our Village is contemplating by downloading a copy of the HOO Amendment here.
The Observer fully supports horse ownership and enjoyment. We also support the right of a resident to board one or two horses for other Village residents. That stated, we cannot support the current commercial boarding proposal that lacks any sensible, objective safeguards to protect adjacent landowners from potential encroachment of their deserved privacy and peace.
Some people mistakenly believe this matter is only about one boarding operation in our Village. It’s not. It’s about any present or future commercial boarding and training facility allowed on any five-acre or more residential property in our Village.
We encourage residents to voice their opinions at the June 18th ZBA Public Hearing at Countryside School. Please do not assume that “someone else” will speak out on your behalf so you don’t need to attend. If you can’t attend, or would prefer not to speak publicly, then send your opinions to the ZBA and Village Board via our Village Clerk either by mail or email at clerk@barringtonhills-il.gov.
– The Observer
We’ll be there……….
Very nice research to illuminate what other similar villages do. Looks to me like a definition like the “for family enjoyment’ or something similar, plus the restriction of the number of “Boarding” horses should be quite reasonable. Of course the permit is also a no-brainer as well.
The laizzes-faire attitude toward commercial horse boarding by Village leadership (contrary to Abboud’s stance over many years) calls further attention to those who believe this sudden need to zone commercial horse boarding is not about commercial horse boarding but about the need for Abboud and the Save 5 Acres slate of Meroni, Messer and Selman to legalize this commercial activity to avoid having to testify in court to allegations of “pay for play” surrounding the Schuman letter and a certain campaign donation which is the focus of the allegations in the Drury complaint.
Legalize commercial horse boarding and Drury’s case becomes moot. That is why Village attorney Burke-Warren has been monitoring this case in court at tax payer expense ($10,000.00).
Keep in mind, ZBA member Anderson is “of counsel” to Messer’s law firm and ZBA member K. Rosene is the wife of John Rosene who was involved in the Save 5 Acres campaign.
Will ZBA members Anderson and Rosene recuse themselves from this process? More importantly, when the issue comes to the Board, will Abboud, Messer, Meroni and Selman (Save 5 Acre slate) recuse themselves? No way!
You see, with B.H. Village leadership, it is not what they tell you and what you see which counts; it is what they fail to tell you and what you don’t see which really counts.
Once again, thank you for your information. This issue has been hanging around the barn for too long, stinks and needs to go to the manure pile.
Unlike other issues that Mr. Abboud has floated in the wind and found unsavory, he is hanging on to this one. This fulfills the “branding” of BH as a true and legit equestrian village by his fiat and that of his flunkies and there is not enough public outcry because people do not understand the implications of this new ordinance.
Because of a lack of opposition, he doesn’t have to throw anyone under the bus as he has in the past. Think back to some of his victims….The Countryside Park District, Dick Lamkey, Jean Maddrell (Cell Tower) and Steve Knoop, David Steiper and the Zoning Board (Lighting Ordinance).
It is the community of BH that are the true victims to a unscrupulous man, his unbridled ego and what he perceives will be his legacy as “leader?” of our village. His leadership is really coming from the wrong end of the horse as the village’s cooked accounting books will eventually show. Even Maria Pappas knows how corrupt he is and Cook County has written the handbook.
Pass the word folks and get people to rein in this ridiculous regulation.
Fanning any flames of a hotly contested issue won’t accomplish an objective “Horse Sense.” The ZBA needs to hear constructive suggestions from residents on what they want included in the amendment and not who should be excluded from deciding. Those members are the cards we have been dealt and it’s doubtful that will change.
“Concerned” is on the right track. Based on the comparison of the other village codes the ZBA needs to include at least one or more circuit breakers in the amendment to satisfy all homeowners not seemingly just the few who currently board horses. A livable and objective limit of stable size, horses allowed, permit requirement, singularly or in combination, seem to have worked for other villages since I don’t recall seeing any of them featured in the news regarding boarding issues like Barrington Hills has been.
I don’t think anyone is fanning flames – the potential conflict of a ZBA member is an important and very real issue. Let’s not forget why this is even being brought up….to ‘legalize’ the costs and actions of our unscrupulous administration and committees. Referring to the ‘cards we are dealt’ – I doubt our founding fathers thought that way and the preceeding statements exemplify the apathy that is rampant within this village. Please do not deceive yourselves into thinking this change or even the addition of revisions to the ordinance will be ‘enforced’. Heck our own engineer/sanitarian does not enforce manure violations now and I see no mention of any restrictions regarding that matter in the ordinance. Heck our own engineer/sanitarian does not even enforce human feces/septic violations. It’s all about who is in and who is out.