The Barrington Hills Observer

Posted in Audio Recordings, BH Polo Club, FPDCC, Land Use, Zoning Board | 1 Comment

One Response

1. on October 27, 2013 at 10:27 AM | Reply Contradictions? Timing?

   Listened to entire ZBA discussion for the addition of a new polo field in Barrington and a few odd conflicts appeared in the testimony worth noting

   1) The petitioner was well prepared and appears to have good intentions. Encouraging investment in the Village is good for all residents, but not at the expense of our commercial use limitation standards.
   2) Some ZBA members appeared to already have all the details, few asked questions and Chairman Freeman, before discussion, made a quote that recommendation to the Trustees would take place. Trustee Joe Messer’s firm is representing the petitioner.
   3) Why did the petitioner state his intent not to have commercial use, but refused to have any special use restrictions on the property. No one probed.
   The ZBA has long understood that intent is not always practice as in case of Oakwood Farms. They illegally built buildings outside of set backs and the Village took no action.
   4) The Village still has not handled properly the conflicts of Home Occupation at Oakwood Farms with interpretation remaining ambiguous.
   5) In response to a member’s question, Attorney Wambaugh said he hadn’t given it thought (relative to the owner having the property leased instead of occupying it himself). Why would this be approved without legal opinion on that important point?
   6) Unclear if fees would be taken for polo use, no demand on that issue was required and should be special use
   7) 7 trailers for players, but viewing area for 50. More traffic?
   8) Much discussion that the land will allow more building because square foot allowances not met, does that mean that the petitioner can enlarge the intended indoor facility footprint
   9) Has the Village already approved the building plans, including site development? If not and there became a conflict, is the Village setting itself up to a problem if the petitioner buys the property and can’t do what he want o accomplish? Seems like the petitioner should want that approval first or he’s already gained ZBA support without public process or the ZBA intends to look the other way as in the case of Oakwood Farms.
   10) Algonquin has become a dangerous street for traffic. Will the Village have additional insurance requirements. Trustee Messer was pretty loud on that issue relative to the recent Festival put on by BH.

   Timing, this petition is on the 10/28 BOT meeting for approval. Still many questions unanswered that few members of the ZBA cared to ask the petitioner. Conflicts with commercial use and ambiguity with Home Occupation appear to be issues that the BOT should probe.

   –

   Loading...