The following was posted to the Village website:
Village of Barrington Hills Response to Media Request
U-Pick Flower Farm Zoning Applications for Agritourism, Agricultural Experiences and Agricultural Sales
“Recently, the Village was contacted by a local news outlet asking for the Village’s position pertaining to submitted text amendment applications providing for agritourism, agricultural experiences and agricultural sales.
The Village of Barrington Hills is unique in that it is almost entirely a residential community. For decades, the Village’s zoning regulations have been designed to promote and protect the overall residential character of the Village.
To achieve that purpose, the Village’s zoning regulations do not allow outdoor commercial/business retail use of a residential property or other primary or secondary uses that are incompatible with single-family residential use in the Village’s residential areas. Again, this is to protect the residential nature of these areas and the peace and tranquility that Village residents have come to expect and enjoy on their properties.
In May 2024, the Village became aware that an outdoor, commercial retail u-pick flowers establishment was operating on a single-family residential property. This commercial business was open to the general public, open and visible to other Village residents, and advertised as a retail business on littleduckyflowerfarm.com and other media outlets. At that time, the Village notified the Property Owners that their outdoor, commercial u-pick flowers operation on their single-family residential property was not permitted under the Village’s zoning regulations.
Since that time, the Property Owners have sought a number of Zoning Code changes requesting significant and fundamental changes in the Village’s residential zoning regulations that would allow for their outdoor, commercial retail u-pick flowers operation and could also allow other similar outdoor commercial business operations to occur on every residential single-family property in the Village.
These proposals were thoughtfully considered by the Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals and the Village Board of Trustees in formal public zoning proceedings. The Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended against the Property Owners’ various proposals finding that the proposed outdoor commercial use of properties is not compatible with the intended residential use of property in the Village’s residential area. The Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals was particularly concerned that under these various proposals, similar outdoor commercial operations could be allowed to occur on every residential single-family property in the Village.
The Village Board has accepted the recommendations of the Village Zoning Board of Appeals and has not approved the Property Owner’s various proposals that would allow for an outdoor, commercial retail u-pick flowers operation on residential property but would also potentially allow for other similar outdoor commercial business operations on every residential single-family property in the Village.
The Village Board’s decisions have been based on the far-reaching implications of the proposals and not based solely in regard to any single property. In all of their decisions, the Board must carefully consider the long-term effects for the entire Village.”
Related: “Zoning Board delivers third strike to Little Ducky Farm,” “Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing (AGAIN) tonight,” “News to us…,” “Village Board of Trustees meets tonight,” “’Agricultural Experience’ application meets a similar fate as ‘Agritourism’ did in August,” “Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing tonight,” “Village Board votes down ‘Agritourism as a Special Use’,” “August Board of Trustees meeting recording released,” “Sitting ducks,” “Special Zoning Board of Appeals meeting scheduled Tuesday”
Do the residents of B Hills realize the Attorney Fees incurred by Chris Yamamoto continually trying to get his business approved! Also, he fully knew Village restriction.
Village code has clearly stated for decades that a Home Occupation is one where, “…the general public will be UNAWARE of its existence.” It simply CANNOT get any clearer than this.
Yet this couple has done everything they can to promote theirs from website to social media to YouTube to signs and they even have a sign on their property entrance advertising their business, and all 24/7.
Please continued to enforce our codes members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and THANK YOU for your service to our community.
I think you’re reaching at this point. Having a website or posting on social media isn’t a zoning violation. It’s 2025. Everyone shares their work online. That part of the code is meant to prevent visible disruptions to the neighborhood, like traffic or noise, not to stop people from telling their story.
There are plenty of folks in town who run home-based businesses and have an online presence. Tutors, consulting. No one calls them out for it. Why is it suddenly a problem when this couple does it? Make it make sense? They’re not disrupting anyone.
Honestly, it’s starting to feel like some people are just looking for anything to hate. Let’s not pretend this is about the code. This has been hard to accept in our community, but it looks like this is about trying to shut someone down just because you don’t like that they exist here. 🤷♀️
Excerpt from Sun Times article today:
“(Yamamoto) first emailed the village in February 2022 to make sure his plan would align with the village’s rules. The village’s response was only to refer to the WRITTEN ZONING CODE. With support from his neighbors, Yamamoto FIGURED HE HAD THE GREEN LIGHT to open Little Ducky that summer.”
WRITTEN ZONING CODE is the only code residents can refer to. It is documented in black and white. I don’t get what else residents are expected to refer to if not the written code. Verbal agreement?
Correct… I’m confused. There is a written zoning code that you cannot have visible commercial businesses… which they were in fact aware of. Which is why they had an appointment based operation.
Perhaps Yamamoto should have followed the adage about what happens when one assumes. The village directed him to the code. The code is clear on commercial businesses. No assumptions needed.
I’ve been to all of the village meetings in regards to these proposals, and what I think everyone needs to understand is that this isn’t about little ducky farm. We are instructed to disregard the farm entirely from the process. This is about the proposed amendments being set forth. If there were people showing up, explaining how the text amendment would benefit our village versus how great the farm is I might be more interested.
How will our village look in a few years with these proposed amendments?
Will it change our need for more over-site from a pretty hands off village? Will our village need more funding to support these endeavors?
If a text amendment passes there will be no application process or oversight. They will have the RIGHT to do whatever the text amendment states. Which seems to be ok with a lot of people – their land their rights. Stop so much government over reach blah blah blah. Stop telling us what we can or can’t do. People, we don’t live on an island on our properties. These changes affect us all. I love that we are having community engagement and interest – but this IS NOT about the flowers! This is about changing the rules for everyone. Are we forgetting 10 years back or so when everyone wanted to board as many horses as they wanted on small plots of land? That was a huge fight. That put a lot of neighbors up against each other. I’m assuming this would open up that debate again. Would it fall under agricultural?
Will our roads be less safe with more traffic? Especially on sleepier roads.
Chris and Sara are lovely people, AMAZING even. Their desire to create something and educate is admirable. If anything we should consider a special use permit again. Unfortunately their original proposal was scary to a lot of us. Open sunrise to sunset; 7 days a week; April through September? That’s a long time. 60 to 90 cars a day. All other special use permits seem to only have 1 event per month or quarter.
Again, I’m saddened by this NBC coverage. But everyone on both sides needs to wake up to the process and not blame our ZBA or trustees for doing their job. It’s their job to think on all the residents, not just the 30-40 households residing in barrington hills that like to visit little ducky farm.
Concerned Resident, if you allow the code amendment that applies for all properties in BH, not just the Little Duck. That means all properties would be open for the public to come in & out for any type of “agritourism” they deem appropriate for their property. That’s not the community we moved to, nor the one the Ducky owners moved to. But, now, because it serves the Ducky’s self interests, they want the entire community to change a code that’s been in existence since BH was founded and the rest of us to be subjected to essentially unfettered commercial agritourism.
Let’s be real. This proposal isn’t some radical departure from Barrington Hills agriculture identity.
This isn’t “unfettered commercial” anything. And yes, the amendment would apply to anyone who meets the criteria, not just one farm. That’s how zoning works. It creates a fair and consistent rule for everyone, not just those with access to get the board to vote how they want. If we’re worried about one farm abusing it, let’s talk about scale and safeguards. Not slam the door on all of it.
The drama surrounding these two is a concocted media bias blitz. No one is stopping them from growing their flowers. No one is stopping them from allowing a neighbor to come in and enjoy the flowers, cut them, bring them home. No one is stopping them from cutting their own flowers, bringing them to a farmers market and selling them. The Yamamotos moved to a town with zoning codes and they broke them by creating a commercial enterprise that affects an entire community. Grow up. Own your mistake. Stop engaging in this narcissistic melodramatic behavior.
Let’s be honest: Barrington Hills has long allowed horse boarding, riding stables, and other equestrian uses on residential properties. That’s part of the village’s rural identity. These are full-blown businesses with daily deliveries, staff, clients, trailers, manure removal, and everything else that comes with large animals and land use. Yet somehow, families picking flowers is where we draw the line?
The Yamamotos aren’t running a nightclub. They’re growing seasonal flowers and offering neighbors a quiet, beautiful way to connect with the land. If our code makes room for horses and hay deliveries, it should have room for flowers and community joy.
Instead of fighting this like it’s an existential threat, maybe we should ask why a zoning code written decades ago is the final word on modern, sustainable, community-minded uses of private land.