Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Land Disconnection’ Category

The Barrington Area Council of Governments (BACOG) is scheduled to meet today at the South Barrington Village Hall.  Judging from minutes from prior BACOG meetings, tonight’s meeting will begin at 7 PM (though no meeting agenda is posted).

BACOG members will no doubt have questions regarding the Old Sutton and Penny Roads property annexation that was unanimously approved last night. In light of this, Village Director of Administrator, Anna Paul, will no doubt chair tonight’s meeting.

The most current minutes available from their November, 28, 2023 meeting can be found here.

Read Full Post »

“Area N”

A source of much debate, press coverage and the resignation of a District official, the 34 +/- property known as “Area N” owned by the South Barrington Park District will be auctioned (again) on February 28th.

According to the District website:

AUCTION OF SBPD PROPERY AREA N

FEBRUARY 28, 2024 at 5:30PM
SOUTH BARRINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER
3 TENNIS CLUB LANE, SOUTH BARRINGTON​

Property Information

Information to Bidders:

Contact information for Auctioneer

Contact information for Jay Morgan

Auction Information

SBPD Real Estate Sales Contract revised 1/22/24

Terms of Sale revised 1/23/24

As far as we know, this property has no relation to the nearby properties in unincorporated Cook County President Cecola is proposing to annex.

Related:Village posts Annexation Notice,” “South Barrington park board votes to halt land sale to Plymouth Brethren Christian Church after clash with residents and being sued. A park commissioner quit amid the vitriol, citing ‘nonsense.’,” “South Barrington parks board cancels sale of land to religious group,” “After public outcry, South Barrington Park District might scrap plan to sell land to religious group,” “Attorneys for South Barrington Park District, church tell judge they want to complete land sale,” “Opponents of the South Barrington Park District land sale to Plymouth Brother Christian Church protest outside meeting, confront commissioners,” “Proposed sale of South Barrington Park District land to church is headed to court,” “Why the South Barrington Park District has halted land sale to church, (Part 2),” “Why South Barrington Park District has halted land sale to church,” “South Barrington Park District proposed property sale updates include request for support,” “Hearing on controversial church plan canceled in South Barrington, but opponents still have their say,” “Why some South Barrington residents oppose plan for new church, school,”  “Nearby South Barrington Park District property sale concerns neighbors

Read Full Post »

The Barrington Hills Park District will hold a public hearing this evening at 6:45 PM regarding their, “Combined Budget & Appropriations Ordinance 2-14-2024-01.” Once again, as has been the case in previous annual hearings of this type, no documentation has been provided by the District for taxpayers to review and comment on prior to the hearing.

A copy of the Hearing Notice agenda can be viewed here.

At 7:00 PM, the Board will convene their regular monthly meeting. Topics on their agenda include:

  • Budget Ordinance 2-14-2024-01
  • Review of the Riding Center Arena Rules
  • Advisory Committee Report
  • Review the FRVPC Agreement, and
  • Closed Session

A copy of their agenda can be viewed here.

Please note neither meeting will be available for remote access via Zoom apparently since no instructions are provided on the District website. If this is not an oversite, then the District has reverted back to their, “None of your damned business,” attitude Village taxpayers have come to expect.

Read Full Post »

Change Prtition

“Why this petition matters
Started by Eric Kuhn

(1) Infrastructure and Services: Annexing new properties would mean the town would need to provide infrastructure and services like roads, water supply, sewage, emergency services, and schools. If the town isn’t prepared to handle this expansion, it could lead to strains on existing resources and potentially impact the quality of services for current residents.

(2) Zoning and Land Use: If the properties south of Penny Road and Sutton have different zoning regulations or land use plans, annexing them could lead to conflicts in terms of development goals and community planning. Incompatible land use could have a negative impact on the aesthetics and character of the town.

(3) Costs and Taxation: Annexation involves costs, including infrastructure development, maintenance, and increased public services. The town would need to carefully assess whether the potential increase in tax revenue from annexed properties would outweigh these additional costs.

(4) Community Input: It’s important to involve residents and property owners in discussions about annexation, as their views and concerns should be taken into account. If there is strong opposition from either the existing residents or the potential annexed residents, it might be wise to reconsider.

(5) Environmental Impact: New developments can have environmental consequences, including habitat disruption, increased traffic, and strain on natural resources. Consideration should be given to how annexation might affect the local environment.
(6) Long-Term Planning: Any decision about annexation should align with the town’s long-term development goals and plans. It’s crucial to consider whether the proposed annexation fits into the broader vision for the town’s growth and development.

(7) Legal and Regulatory Factors: Annexation might involve legal complexities, including negotiations, paperwork, and adherence to local and state regulations. It’s important to ensure that the annexation process follows all legal requirements.

(8) Economic Considerations: If the properties south of Penny Road and Sutton don’t contribute significantly to the town’s economy, the financial benefits of annexation might not outweigh the costs and potential disruptions.

Ultimately, the decision to annex properties is a complex one that should be based on a thorough analysis of various factors, careful planning, and open communication with all stakeholders involved. For the most up-to-date and accurate information, I recommend reaching out to local officials or consulting recent town documents and meetings.”

View the petition here.

Read Full Post »

CRG Residental

This rendering shows one of the six apartment buildings CRG Residential is proposing for the northwest corner of Higgins and Old Sutton roads as part of the Plum Farms development in Hoffman Estates. This building closest to the corner would be among those also including some ground-floor retail space.

Hoffman Estates officials expressed informal support Monday for a six-building apartment complex with some retail space to kick off construction of the long-delayed Plum Farms development at the northwest corner of Higgins Road and Route 59.

But they also urged developers to keep aware of the floodplain that overlaps the sprawling property during installation of underground utilities as well as surface construction.

CRG Residential of Carmel, Indiana, sought the courtesy review from the village board’s planning, building and zoning committee for 310 apartments spread among the six buildings specifically on the tax-increment finance district at the northwest corner of Higgins and Old Sutton roads.

Three of the buildings would be three stories, while the other three would be four stories. The ground floors of some of the buildings would also provide commercial space totaling about 14,000 square feet, including at the corner itself.

Representatives of CRG Residential suggested that commercial space might find such uses as an eatery or coffee shop as well as a medical or dental office.

The current owners of the 185 acres that make up the Plum Farms development also have plans for a self-storage facility along the railroad tracks at the western edge of the property.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Plum Farms

A proposal for six three-story apartment buildings with 310 unit sand some ground-floor retail space will be the subject of a courtesy review by the Hoffman Estates village board next Monday, Nov 8. The site is the northwest corner of Higgins and Old Sutton roads.

Six apartment buildings with 310 units and retail businesses on the ground floors of the three of them could be what kicks off construction of the long-delayed Plum Farms development in Hoffman Estates.

The village board is scheduled to grant a courtesy review of the proposal by Carmel, Indiana-based CRG Residential next Monday night.

The planned three-story buildings would be constructed in two distinct styles on the northwest corner of Higgins and Old Sutton roads, said Hoffman Estates’ Director of Development Services Peter Gugliotta. One of those styles would feature 20,000 square feet of retail space on the first floor, he added.

The project would be within the 40 acres of a tax increment financing district approved in January 2020 to reimburse the cost of bringing utilities to the northwest and northeast corners of Higgins and Old Sutton. Including right of way, the TIF district totals 64 acres.

Excluding that right of way, the Plum Farms property totals 185 acres stretching from the northwest corner of Higgins Road and Route 59.

The Plum Farms annexation agreement with Hoffman Estates allows for a total of 1,250 dwelling units of various types. Gugliotta said there could be more multifamily units than the 310 CRG Residential is seeking, but single-family homes also are expected to make up a significant part of the Plum Farms development.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

(Please click on image to enlarge)

Hickory Hill Park in Carpentersville will be undergoing a major overhaul thanks to a $363,800 park improvement grant.

Dundee Township Park District is one of 85 recipients statewide to receive funding from the Open Space Lands Acquisition and Development grant program administered by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, district officials said.

The 13.36-acre Hickory Hill Park, located at 770 Navajo Drive, has a baseball diamond but little else as far as amenities, district Executive Director Dave Peterson said.

Planned improvements include a bike repair station, basketball court, playground, picnic shelter and a nine-hole disc golf course. The baseball field will be replaced with free-play soccer areas.

Read more here.

Editorial note: 770 Navajo Drive is the address of District 220’s former Woodland Early Learning Center.

Read Full Post »

Barrington Unit District 220’s lawsuit against Hoffman Estates and the developers of the Plum Farms proposal for the northwest corner of routes 59 and 72 was dismissed this week . (Click on image to enlarge)

Barrington Unit District 220’s lawsuit against Hoffman Estates and the developers of the stalled

Barrington Unit District 220’s lawsuit against Hoffman Estates and the developers of the Plum Farms proposal for the northwest corner of routes 59 and 72 was dismissed this week.

proposal at the northwest corner of routes 59 and 72 has been dismissed by a Cook County circuit court judge.

But the question of how much that lawsuit had to do with the residential and commercial project’s idleness for the past 2½ years has yet to be answered.

Members of the Plum Farms development partnership did not respond to a request for comment, and Hoffman Estates officials said they haven’t heard from them, either, since the lawsuit’s dismissal on Monday.

As proposed, Plum Farms would include single-family homes on 145 acres previously disconnected from Barrington Hills. The remainder of the land would combine multifamily housing and commercial development.

Hoffman Estates’ development agreement limits Plum Farms to 1,250 dwelling units of various types, but the most recent plan submitted by the developer calls for only 1,035.

Read more from the Daily Herald here.

Read Full Post »

In May of last year, the Board of Trustees directed the Plan Commission to review the Village Comprehensive Plan and make recommendations for any changes they saw fit for the Board to adopt. The last time the Comprehensive Plan was updated was 2005 and amendments were approved in 2008.

After nearly a year of work and meetings, the Plan Commission has agreed to the changes they would like seen in the Plan. A copy of their proposed 2019 Village Comprehensive Plan can be viewed and downloaded here.

A public hearing is scheduled for July 8th at 6:30 PM to allow residents to voice their comments, or feedback can be provided to the Village Clerk at clerk@vbhil.gov.

Read Full Post »

Screen Shot 2018-08-26 at 2.45.14 PMOnce again, supporters of former Village President Bob Abboud have taken to the social media networks to begin creating a false controversy to stir the pot prior to the 2019 Village Board Elections.

Recently, some Facebook pages have started publishing information about the proposed Plum Farms Development in Hoffman Estates. One of these pages is purportedly run by the same individual who publicly cast aspersions upon the character of the Village President and members of the Board of Trustees in April of 2017 (but was unwilling and unable to provide any corroboration of her ridiculous accusations). See April 24th Board meeting recordings released.

Long-time readers of the Observer will recognize the same tired tactics of the Abboud-o-philes: create a false controversy, then stir up resident sentiment against current leadership and against those whom they may support in the upcoming elections. Save 5 Acres! Save Horse Boarding! Ban the Bikes! Save Open Space! Save Polo!

The Plum Farms Development in Hoffman Estates was used as a major 2017 campaign issue by Trustees Paula Jacobsen and Robert Zubak, but both have been eerily silent on the issue for well over a year. As candidates, Jacobsen and Zubak were so adamant about the Village having legal standing, authority and ability to impact this development, and they vowed to be the voices to vigorously “oppose harmful development”.

Today, as it was then, they chose to remain ignorant to the simple fact that this issue was over in 2004 when Bob Abboud and former administrator Bob Kosin botched the chance to work with the landowner to come to a development compromise that would have kept the property within the village, and would have protected our community from the dangers of deannexation of the parcel into an adjacent town with an insatiable hunger for more tax dollars.

But in fact, the current administration has been working in concert with South Barrington and District 220 to slow the progress of this development.  Strange that this hasn’t been reported by any of the social media outlets managed by those folks who enjoy stirring the pot.  Accusations of inaction and mismanagement by President McLaughlin and others on the Board will be aired, but nary a word of criticism of Jacobsen or Zubak.

And speaking of Jacobsen, the more vocal of the less-than-dynamic duo, what has she personally done with regard to Plum Farms as a Trustee? Nothing.  She bemoaned the Longmeadow Parkway project as a candidate, but did she volunteer to be on the IDOT advisory board for Route 62?  Nope.

Does anyone remember the laundry list of issues that she & Zubak used as their campaign platform? We do.

YBH_issues

The only issue they are truly interested in is commercial horse boarding, which wasn’t in their campaign platform at all.  Strange…

And back to that lengthy list of issues — what have they accomplished from that list? Nothing. And why?  Because none of those “problems” actually existed.

21558735_208149243054416_8233545302995328152_n

Paula Jacobsen with former trustee Fritz Gohl

However, Jacobsen, who has been absent from more than 26% of the fifteen Board Meetings held since she was elected as trustee, has had the opportunity to advocate for some other interesting issues.  As stated in our previous articles, May and June 2017 Board meeting recordings released  and July Board Meeting recordings released , she has found time to question the meeting minutes which characterized her friend’s public comments at the April 24thboard meeting as slanderous.  She has questioned why the Village couldn’t have employed a warmer and fuzzier process to inform a property owner of their violation of a cease and desist order with regard to illegal demolition of a residence and violation of the tree ordinance. It should be noted that the property owner in that case was a prominent donor to her trustee campaign.

Jacobsen has pondered the complexity of the Exterior Lighting Ordinance and wondered if it shouldn’t be revisited and revised, oblivious to the divisive history of the ordinance.  Coincidentally, her interest in lighting ordinance enforcement occurred only when another friend of hers had filed a complaint against a neighbor.

Paula has also suggested giving landmark status to historical homes in the village.  When asked to explain who would be the arbiter of this distinction and the mechanics of implementation or enforcement, she had no suggestion.

She also has given detailed reports of Arbor Day plans by the Heritage & Environs Committee at no fewer than three meetings. Let’s hear it for the oak sapling giveaway!!

And there has been advocacy for costly live video-streaming of Village Board meetings, which are only attended by a handful of the same residents each month.

It is not surprising that NONE of these issues were in the Jacobsen/Zubak campaign platform and that NONE of the issues in the platform have been pursued by the duo in any meaningful way in the past fifteen months.

And why is that? Because a quiet village operating harmoniously is not something the Abboud-o-philes can tolerate.  They must have controversy and they will create controversy were none exists. And when faced with the reality that President McLaughlin & this Administration have delivered on each and every promise they have made to the community, they pivot back to the old worn-out talking points. The village is operating better than it ever has, spending has been slashed and services are more efficient.  And that makes some embittered people very unhappy.  Change is not easy for some. And they are desperate to regain control.

So the pot stirring will continue.  With a little eye of newt and toe of frog mixed in for good measure.  Here’s hoping that this bad spell will be broken soon.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »