Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Special Use Permits’ Category

phantom-developer-costume-2

Following are some of the articles published by The Observer for the month of October in recent years. These articles, gathered from various publications and editorials, are noteworthy for residents in that they remind us of where we’ve been as a community.

August 2011 Village Board minutes posted – 2011

Excerpt from ZBA report: “Three members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, Judith Freeman, Karen Rosene and Kurt Anderson, joined the Board of Trustees in the discussion of commercial boarding.  Ms. Freeman submitted a draft ordinance document regarding commercial boarding and wanted comments back from the Board of Trustees. The ZBA has proposed suggested [sic] a Special Use Permit if boarding ten or more horses.

Trustee Messer felt the Village has no overcrowding issue and we should address the issue when it comes up.  Trustee Meroni felt a Special Use Permit was an unnecessary burden.   Trustee Selman stated that horse boarding should be under Home Occupation.” (see Flip, Flop : What changed your minds Trustees Messer, Meroni and Selman?)

Complete minutes from the August 2011 Village Board meeting can be viewed here.

Developer to sell McHenry County land near Barrington Hills – 2013

A 602-acre property, most of which was disconnected from Barrington Hills during a long, intense legal fight that began early last decade, is being put up for sale by its would-be developer.  The Fritz Duda Co. is asking for $17 million for the jaggedly bordered undeveloped land at Spring Creek and Haegers Bend roads in McHenry County, along Barrington Hills’ border with Algonquin.

Read the Daily Herald story here.

Glimpses back in time at the heritage of Barrington Hills – 2015

VBH Area Map Circa 1940In the years since The Observer began, we’ve been fortunate enough to accumulate some information on the rich history that occurred before and after Barrington Hills was officially incorporated in 1957.  Today seemed to be an appropriate time to share what we’ve discovered with our readers in advance of the third annual Barrington Hills Heritage Fest taking place tomorrow.

Some time ago, a reader shared a map with us depicting what life was like in this area in 1940, and it’s quite a unique contrast from the village we now live in today.

Revisit this well-read article from last year by here.

To settle, or not to settle, that is (not) the question – 2015

We’ve had the opportunity to listen to the recordings from the September 23rd Special Village Board Meeting to hear public comment on whether to settle a suit filed against the Village over the Recent Commercial Horse Boarding code amendment.  Additionally, we’ve read all the published written comments which were submitted (seen here).

Thirty-nine people provided comments for the board to review.  None of them criticized horses, nor did they call for banning boarding in Barrington Hills.  No one called for existing horse boarding operations to be shuttered, and not one complaint was voiced against a neighboring barn, so it’s fair to say current boarding operations (save for one) are not in peril in Barrington Hills based on this small sampling.

Read the original Observer editorial here.

-The Observer

*See “WARNING: Beware of phantom developers!” for more on this year’s Halloween costume of choice among Barrington Hills youths.

Read Full Post »

Dear Neighbors and Friends,

We hope this editorial finds you and your family in good health and enjoying the fall in Barrington Hills, because if the Anderson II horse boarding and training codes remain in effect much longer, those pleasures may become a thing of the past.

Anderson II (or as we’ve termed it, LeCompte/Anderson) established a privileged class of properties within our Village with zoning code variances available to anyone boarding horses, whether it’s one or dozens.  We’ve chronicled that before in these pages (see “Our views on the latest horse boarding text amendment proposal”), but the most flagrant flaw is that now the largest structure on any Barrington Hills property can be a barn, not the primary residence, as has been the tradition for decades.

To illustrate how far just this one loophole can be taken, we found a 5.01-acre property actively on the market in the unincorporated Barrington area as an example:

under-anderson-ii

Anderson II proponents will be the first to claim this would never happen, or if it did, it would be extremely rare, but sensible zoning codes are enacted to protect residents from exceptions such as this, and that is what our Zoning Board is currently considering.

Despite the many flaws in Anderson II, there are some in our community who have been lead to believe its repeal will mean the end of horse boarding entirely in Barrington Hills, or at least they claim that’s the intent of the Zoning and Village Boards. It is NOT. 

If this were true, why did the current administration approve a twenty-year extension of the special use permit for polo matches, including the Kalaway Cup, at Oakwood Farm?  This administration also approved construction of recently debated indoor and outdoor polo fields at the corner of Algonquin and Old Sutton Roads.

Ever since the Zoning Board began considering a petition to amend horse boarding codes earlier this summer, there has been a flurry of direct mail, blog postings and social media campaigns intended to stir up the equestrian community, and others, within and outside our community.

In addition, one seemingly well-funded resident sent a book with pretty pictures and stickers to residents for no apparent reason other than to confuse matters further.  We will tackle that in a future piece, but this unsolicited gesture has most residents we know scratching their heads wondering why it was sent and for what purpose other than political. 

If these campaigns have served any purpose, it’s to confuse residents.  People who have backyard boarding businesses have been led to believe they will be shut down in favor of large-scale boarding operations that threaten their businesses, while large-scale boarding operators believe the opposite is true.  From what we’ve witnessed, neither is true.

We understand how some horse owners can get emotionally charged whenever changes are being considered that may or may not affect them.  There’s no denying, some are so passionate about their horses, it’s almost an obsession, and there’s actually a term for it – Hippomania.

At one time, or throughout one’s life, we all can become passionate about something.   We will defend anyone’s right to be passionate about horses, so long as they don’t impose it on neighbors and friends, which is exactly what Anderson II enables.

We also don’t condone these people being manipulated and misled by fellow equestrians, politicians and developers, and it appears that is exactly what is occurring again in our community, much the same as when people were told polo matches would end during the last election campaign (see “Polo politicking – SOS Party style”).

Yes, the Zoning Board of Appeals is considering recommending repealing the Anderson II codes and reinstating the Home Occupation Ordinance (HOO), as the most recent mailing to the proletariat from a “Neighbor and Friend” on a hilltop stated (a copy can be viewed here). 

What was purposely omitted from that communique is the board is doing this as a temporary measure to get the exposure Anderson II has created off the books, so that sound and equitable codes can be drafted to protect the interests of all residents.   

Considering the integrity demonstrated by those now serving on the current Zoning Board, this seems to be the fair and proper direction to pursue, and we believe the quiet majority of residents agree.

-The Observer

Editor’s note:  Anyone wishing to listen to the audio recordings of recent Zoning Board meetings can do so by accessing our archive of releases by clicking here.

 

Read Full Post »

Partial audio recordings* from the Sept. 20th Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at Countryside Elementary School are available for review, however the quality of the recordings is very poor.  This likely contributed to the fact that the only recording available is the meeting in its entirety, and not edited by meeting agenda topic.

The meeting began with member David Stieper withdrawing his motion from the August 30th meeting.  He stated he was doing so “for the sake of simplicity.”  From what we can gather, the better path was to vote on the amendment before them as originally proposed, and not amend it, as Stieper had previously moved.

In the discussion that ensued, it appears the direction some on the Zoning Board wished to pursue was twofold:

  • Restore boarding codes to pre-2015 language, or the Home Occupation Ordinance, and
  • Draft new codes based on historical information already gathered and new information available

One member stated they had reviewed the “Anderson II”/”LeCompte/Anderson” language and stated the longer it stays on the books the more problematic it may become due to multiple “loopholes” and “ambiguities” in the drafting. 

Another member chose to take the matter entirely away from the topic of horse boarding when they stated, “I think what it comes down to is, are we a residential community or a commercial community?  I think everyone sitting here would agree first, and foremost, we are a residential community.”

We strongly encourage readers to listen to his full remarks on the matter by clicking here.

Multiple members also concurred that smaller or “backyard” boarding operations should be left alone for the most part, as should most of the larger scale “commercial” boarding businesses.

After an hour (as measured by the recording) of discussion, member Stieper made a fairly detailed motion to effectively repeal the current, newly enacted horse boarding codes and revert back to the Home Occupation Ordinance management of boarding.  His motion can be heard here.

Once his motion was seconded, he handed out printed copies of new language for the board to review before their next meeting in October.  This contrasts greatly with what occurred at the September 2014 Zoning Board meeting when a new amendment draft (Anderson II) was distributed and voted upon at the same meeting, before some board members had an adequate opportunity to review and consider it.

To access the recording of the full meeting, click here.

The Zoning Board will meet on October 17th at 6:30 PM at Countryside Elementary School to discuss this latest proposed horse boarding amendment.

*According to the Village website, only a portion of the meeting was recorded, presumably due to some technical malfunction.  The recording of the unanimous vote to not accept the proposed Drury commercial horse boarding text amendment apparently was among the missing recordings.

Perhaps since some of the recordings are barely audible at times, the Village might consider publishing the transcript of the meeting at some future date.  

Read Full Post »

Friday FlashbackFollowing are some of the articles published by The Observer for the month of September in recent years. These articles, gathered from various publications and editorials, are noteworthy for residents in that they remind us of where we’ve been as a community.

Appellate court sides with Barrington Hills on horse boarding issue – 2011

The village of Barrington Hills has the authority to regulate horse boarding on residential property, according to a recent appellate court ruling that could end at least one part of three-year legal fight over a local horse farm.

Barrington Hills residents Cathleen and Benjamin LeCompte sued the village last year, challenging its jurisdiction over their Oakwood Farms, located on a residentially zoned 130-acre site along Bateman Road.

The couple appeared before Barrington Hills’ zoning board of appeals in August 2008, arguing that the operation — which features a barn large enough to house 60 horses and 110 acres of riding space — is an agricultural use outside the village’s ability to regulate. The zoning board disagreed, and a Cook County court later sided with the village.

Read the full Daily Herald article here.

Zoning Board approves horse boarding text amendment – 2014

The Zoning Board of Appeals met last Thursday evening to discuss, and possibly recommend, one of four horse boarding text amendment proposals that they had heard testimony and public comment on during previous meetings.  By the end of the meeting, the board narrowly approved a text amendment, but it was not one of the four that had been previously been heard by the board and had never before been made available to residents for comment.

Read the original Observer commentary with 33 reader comments here.

Barrington Hills board debates horse boarding plan – 2014

Barrington Hills trustees sent a controversial horse boarding plan back to the village’s zoning board Monday night for clarification on 11 points before they take a vote.

The board’s action came after more than 2½ hours of public comment and board discussion before a large group of residents in the Countryside Elementary School gymnasium.

Critics of the plan, which would allow landowners to board three horses for each acre of property, said it did not receive the proper scrutiny of the zoning board.

Revisit one of the most commented stories ever here.

So why is the Village being sued (again) over commercial horse boarding? – 2015

The simple answer to the question of why we’re being sued is that some elected and appointed Village officials put us in this position last December when they approved a commercial horse boarding amendment to our code which clearly favored one party over another in a private lawsuit that did not involve our Village.

In order to fully understand the rationale behind the suit, residents need to understand the history of one commercial horse boarding operation in the Village that has, in our opinion, consumed an inordinate amount of time, energy and taxpayers’ money for too long now.

Read or revisit the full Observer editorial with reader comments here.

Commercial horse boarding amendment commentary – 2015

When you get right down to brass tacks, the seven of you are called upon to decide whether 5-acre residential zoning standards will be the “only consideration” concerning “development” and “use” on parcels of land in Barrington Hills zoned R-1 (5 acres) or will these residential zoning standards take a “back seat” to commercial enterprise when this enterprise takes the form of “horse boarding for a fee”; on any scale; large or small?

Read this guest essay from a year ago here.

* * * * * * * * *

Editor’s note: Since 2009, 223 articles have been categorized with a reference tag of “Commercial Horse Boarding” including this one in The Observer.

By any measure, this is far too many, and it is our fervent hope the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Board of Trustees can finally come to an agreement in the near future on regulations for horse boarding that all residents can live with for decades to come.  This semi-annual (and sometimes annual) unnecessary dispute between residents is a senseless waste of time and energy, and only serves to continue to divide our community.

-The Observer

Read Full Post »

The Zoning Board of Appeals will be meeting to continue their discussions and likely vote on proposed text amendments to horse boarding and training codes this evening beginning at 6:30 PM at Countryside Elementary School.  A copy of the agenda can be viewed here.

Read Full Post »

Friday FlashbackFollowing are some of the articles published by The Observer for the months of July and August in recent years. These articles, gathered from various publications and editorials, are noteworthy for residents in that they remind us of where we’ve been as a community.

Village Board considering ZBA proposal on horse boarding – July 2011

ZBA chair Judith Freeman presented a proposal to address horse boarding codes in the Village at the July BOT meeting.  President Abboud deferred discussion/comment by the board of the ZBA proposal until the August BOT meeting to allow time for trustees to further consider the proposal.

The ZBA proposal calls for any property owner that boards ten (10) horses or more within the Village on R-1 properties to be classified as “Commercial” and residents boarding nine (9) or fewer horses would be allowed to conduct their businesses under the “Home Occupation Ordinance.”

The proposal can be viewed here.

Another blame game – July 2012

Monday evening the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) discussed public comments on the commercial horse boarding amendment to the Home Occupation Ordinance (HOO). During that meeting several members of the ZBA, most notably Chairperson Judith Freeman and Kurt Anderson, expressed their condescending opinions that residents who opposed the amendment failed to understand it.  Anderson, quoted in the Daily Herald cited what he called “a campaign of both disinformation and misinformation.”

Anderson is somewhat correct, as there has been an ongoing campaign to obfuscate the entire issue of expanding commercial boarding within Barrington Hills.  But the campaign is not being waged by opponents of commercial activity; it is being waged by our own Village leadership and administration.  And, it is a campaign of distraction, misinformation and spin.

Read the original editorial and comments here.

Our views on two horse boarding amendment proposals – July 2014

The Zoning Board of Appeals will conduct a public hearing Monday, July 21st  at 7:30 PM at Countryside School related to two proposed horse boarding text amendment proposals* submitted earlier this month.

Last week, The Observer summarized some of the highlights of the two proposals, such as hours of operations and allowable horse population (seeJuly 21 Zoning Board Public Hearing announced”). We have also commented on the apparent conflicts of interests stemming, in part, from these proposals.   Additional scrutiny of the proposals has led to some very troubling questions and discoveries.

The original article can be read here.

Deer Park board votes to withdraw from BACOG – July 2015

The Deer Park Village Board voted to end their membership in the Barrington Area Council of Governments (BACOG) during their last monthly meeting held on Monday, July 20th, by a vote of 4-1.

At their June meeting, the Deer Park board questioned Janet Agnoletti, Executive Director of BACOG, on a number of issues, including the way membership dues were determined among the various members.  Specifically, one board member questioned why the Deer Park share was so high, given the size and population of Deer Park in comparison to other BACOG members.

Read the original Observer article, including comments here.

Horse boarding continues to draw controversy in Barrington Hills – August 2011

Barrington Hills officials agree the village’s ordinance on home businesses needs tweaking to deal with large commercial horse boarders on residential properties, but they disagree on what exactly needs to be done.

The board held a joint meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals this week to discuss the ordinance amendment ZBA members are currently working on. The Board of Appeals is looking at requiring large boarding operations, defined as 10 or more horses, to acquire a special use permit to the Home Occupation Ordinance. That ordinance allows people to run small businesses — everything from music lessons to attorney’s offices — from their homes.

Read more from the Chicago Tribune article here.

Why Barrington Hills must change – August 2014

In his WTTW documentary “Northwest of Chicago,” Geoffrey Baer quoted a local source who declared Barrington Hills, Barrington and South Barrington to be “North shore communities without the shore.”  This may have been true when the show first aired, but this is far from accurate today.

Read any recent real estate report on the average time on the market for homes in our area and you’ll find our Village bests all others for the wrong reasons.  Barrington Hills homes consistently have the longest time on the market and lead at the lowest sale price compared to the original asking price.  Home and lot values have plunged to prices not seen in over a decade.

Read more of the editorial, including comments, here.

Northwest Herald article misstates Longmeadow Parkway facts, polls readers – 2015

Today’s print and web-based editions of the Northwest Herald contain the same article published in the Kane County Chronicle Friday (see “Longmeadow Parkway project slated for 2016 start despite growing opposition”) regarding Barrington Hills’ opposition to the Longmeadow Parkway project.  Unfortunately, both articles, written by the same reporter, contain the following statement:

“After years of support, which included a successful 2006 advisory referendum, the Barrington Hills Village Board in June stated it now opposes the parkway.”

The Village of Barrington Hills has never posed a referendum question on any ballot pertaining to the Longmeadow Parkway project.

Read the original article and comments here.

-The Observer

Read Full Post »

The Village has released audio recordings from the August 15th Zoning Board of Appeals continued public hearing regarding proposed amendments to commercial horse boarding codes.  The menu of edited recordings by agenda topic can be accessed here.

Before the hearing began, Dr. Gwynne Johnston, chair of the Board of Health, made a brief presentation on the board’s positions on horse boarding and well water quality.  A copy of his presentation can be read here, or the audio recording can be heard here.

The Board of Health has begun a long-term study of water samples from nine wells throughout the Village, beginning with baseline sampling for long-term tracking of any changes to water quality, due to any number of factors, including horse keeping and boarding.

While their focus has been on “sub-surface” water, however, Gewalt Hamilton has been studying the Flint and Spring Creek waterways in Barrington Hills, and their February 2016 report to Bob Kosin, Village Administrator, indicated water testing levels above acceptable limits for fecal coliform, phosphorus, etc., as depicted below:GH Creek Water Testing

A copy of the complete Gewalt Hamilton surface water testing report can be viewed here.  We suggest that the Board of Health participate in this ongoing study as well, since it’s unclear what Mr. Kosin does with these reports.

The next person to speak was John Blackburn of Blackburn Architects, the firm that designed the proposed HARPS facility in unincorporated McHenry County for the developers of Barrington Hills Farm.  The chair allowed him to speak next since he was purportedly scheduled to return to Washington, D.C. (However, he remained in attendance for the entire meeting.)

Blackburn provided a summary of his experience and his philosophies for designing equestrian facilities which must include the health needs of the horse, the needs of the owner and must meet the demands of the site where the facility is to be built.

At no point did he mention consideration of surrounding properties.  Similarly, his design of the HARPS facility calls for parking stalls for ten horse trailers near a northern border of the development  — closest to the neighboring Barrington Hills residential properties, as seen here.

When Blackburn concluded his remarks, a ZBA member asked his opinion on how much space is needed for horses in order to have a “successful horse facility?”  Blackburn responded, “Generally the rule of thumb is an acre per horse,” but stressing that each property is different.  That exchange can be heard here.

Later on, Blackburn was asked the same question, but with more qualifications such as if the horse is fed grain and other nutrients such that they aren’t reliant on grazing on grasses for sustenance, would his one acre rule of thumb apply, and he answered with a qualified “yes” as can be heard here.

When the public hearing was opened, the first person to speak was the chairman of Barrington Hills Farm.  During his testimony, he stated, “Barrington Hills Farm invested significant money and effort based on the village’s identity as an equestrian community and the current ordinances in the village code.”

By “current ordinances,” we assume he referred to the LeCompte/Anderson code.

He went on to state, “Both the village’s longstanding image as an equestrian community and Barrington Hills Farm’s purpose in acquiring land in Barrington Hills will be devastated by the proposed amendment.” Both statements can be heard here.

When a board member asked him when the Barrington Hills Farm property was purchased, he replied, “I don’t have an exact date.”  When asked if it was prior to 2015, he responded, “Oh, hell, I don’t know.”  The recording of this exchange can be heard here.

The McHenry County records show most, if not all, of the property titles that make up Barrington Hills Farm were transferred on September 29th and 30th of 2014.  One can assume negotiations and closure of the sale of those properties occurred at least a month or more prior to those dates.

The LeCompte/Anderson horse boarding code was not approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals until early December of 2014, and it was not passed by the Board of Trustees until February of 2015.  As a matter of fact, in early September of 2014, the Zoning Board was still considering four separate boarding text amendments before them from four residents according to records.

And, as we’ve previously written, most of the 602 acre Barrington Hills Farm property is in unincorporated McHenry County, and Barrington Hills codes do not apply to the present or future development plans of his organization.

The balance of the nearly two and a half hour meeting revealed nothing new to report.  It was too much more of “he said, she said” banter that’s really unproductive, so much so, that even those in the audience who are allies of a given speaker are even telling them to sit down.

What is clearly evident is some in our community are attempting to stall the progress of the Zoning Board, and most are now becoming weary of it.  We’re aware of why some are stretching this out, and we’ll be reporting the reason at a future date.

In the meantime, the next meeting of the Zoning Board is scheduled for Tuesday, August 30th at 6:30 PM at Countryside Elementary School.

Read Full Post »

Audio recordings from the August 1st Zoning Board of Appeals public hearing regarding a proposed text amendment to commercial horse boarding codes have been posted to the Village website.  To access the menu of edited recordings by agenda item, click here.

The hearing lasted just over two hours and fifteen minutes.  It would likely have lasted much longer, but the multipurpose room at Countryside Elementary School was only available until 10:00 PM.

We’ve reviewed the recordings entirely, and after a certain point, it became readily apparent that accurately summarizing what transpired during the entire meeting would be too long for readers to endure.  Indeed, after an hour and a half we felt like the crew assigned to clean up after horses in a holiday parade of equal duration – overloaded with muck, good for nothing except composting.

Two residents made public comments prior to the hearing.  The first to speak was a sitting trustee on our Village Board, and his remarks can be heard by clicking here.

The second person to speak was a resident who took exception to comments made at a prior Board of Trustees meeting regarding groundwater pollutants from equestrian facilities, and also volunteered to provide the Zoning Board with documentation in her possession of groundwater contamination.  Her comments can be heard here.

When the public hearing was convened, the Zoning Board chair read a statement from the Village regarding the petition before the board and the Village’s position as it relates to ongoing litigation between neighbors.  Click here to review this recording.

The attorney representing the petition applicant was then invited to present their proposed text amendment, which took about forty-five minutes, including questions from the board.  This recording can be heard here.

Attendees were then invited to ask questions or provide facts for the board to consider in their deliberations.  Unfortunately, the hour that ensued was spent on matters from the past on horse boarding issues, some personal assaults and little, if anything, productive for the board to consider.

In our opinion, the chair and counsel allowed too much latitude for attendees to pursue personal agendas instead of presenting facts at this meeting.  But then again, they are not veterans of these contentious testimony rodeos.  Perhaps with the first hearing under their belts, tonight’s continuation will include more relevant testimony for the Zoning Board to consider and less infighting that serves no useful purpose.

Read Full Post »

microphoneThe Zoning Board of Appeals will holding a meeting tonight at Countryside Elementary School to continue their public hearing from August 1st regarding a proposed amendment to commercial horse boarding codes.  The meeting begins at 7:30 PM, and a copy of the full agenda, including updated written comments for consideration by the board, can be viewed and downloaded here.

Read Full Post »

OMG

If the title of this piece sounds familiar, it should be.  In May of 2014, we published a similarly titled editorial, “Here We Go Again. . . . Commercial Horse Boarding Drama Returns.”  Click here to revisit it.

We’ve written numerous editorials about the seemingly incessant nearly decade–long debate on how Barrington Hills should regulate large-scale horse boarding– due primarily to misinformation circulated by a small faction of self-serving activists in our once peaceful community.

Since this same, timeworn misinformation is appearing again in social media now that the Zoning Board of Appeals is considering revisions to our boarding codes, we’d like to dispel what’s become “old nag’s tales” spun in websites, mailings and public hearings:

“Barrington Hills is an Equestrian Community” Only in 2005 was Barrington Hills branded as a rural equestrian community by the then newly elected village president in return for the Riding Club’s support of his campaign.  The fact is Barrington Hills is a rural residential community that is equine friendly. However, the ability to keep horses is not what attracted most residents to our community.

A 2012 survey conducted by The Observer (seen here) showed 65% of residents moved to Barrington Hills for open space and privacy, while only 13% moved to Barrington Hills to keep horses. “Borrowing” our survey results, the 2015 “Save Open Space” (SOS) campaign committee tried to play on the motivations of the majority of residents who moved here for open space with rhetoric very similar to what we’re witnessing today.

“Barrington Hills was founded as an equestrian community” This is news to most, but nonetheless, false.  Barrington Hills was incorporated in 1957 based on “A desire to retain the rustic landscape.”

In fact, the 1978 Barrington Hills Comprehensive Plan (seen here) only references the words horse, horses and horseback six times in the entire document, and horse boarding is never mentioned.  And, the introduction of the 1978 plan described Barrington Hills as follows:

(Click on image to enlarge)

(Click on image to enlarge)

It’s also interesting to note that this 1978 plan encouraged a “safe and attractive system of pathways for walking, biking, horseback riding and cross-country skiing.”  Clearly, times have changed.

The 1978 plan also cautions, “The possibility of pollution from animal wastes exists related to horses which are stabled in the lower portion of the reach,“ referring to an area, “west of the Spring Creek Nature Preserve between Lake-Cook Road to the north and Algonquin Road to the southwest.”

The 2008 Barrington Hills Comprehensive Plan mentions horse, horses and horseback eighteen times, but many of those references are cautionary regarding the environment and potential pollution to groundwater from the equines.  And thirty years later, a warning of contamination from animal waste from horses stabled in that same area west of the Forest Preserve was reiterated.

As far as horse boarding is concerned, the 2008 plan makes no mention at all of horse boarding.  NONE!

However, we believe, if properly regulated, boarding facilities can provide a benefit to residents seeking the pleasure of riding without the upkeep.

“Those favoring reasonable residential boarding codes are ‘anti-horse’ or ‘horse haters’” Ridiculous! Who among us in Barrington Hills doesn’t appreciate horses?  We don’t know any – not one!

But many people have issues with the owners of the horses who choose to obfuscate their selfish behavior by capitalizing on the noble horse.

These ridiculous assertions fall flat when considering how some in social media seem to regard non-equestrians, as we opined in our 2015 editorial, “We’ve Been Clubbed by Commercial Horse Boarding.”  Click here to revisit this piece, including many reader comments.  Or, just click here to learn how non-equestrian homeowners are perceived by a current Barrington Hills Park District commissioner who is also president of the Barrington Hills Polo Club.  The author has dismissed the outrage created by his essay, calling his piece “ironic”, yet his ilk finds nothing ironic about the current RJE debate.

“Our five-acre zoning depends on horses and boarding” This is another fallacy.  Five-acre zoning in Barrington Hills is secured by our Comprehensive Plan and supporting Village Code.  If we were four, three or two-acre zoned, the same claim would be made.

If five-acre zoning was ever threatened in our village history, it would likely have occurred in the mid-1970’s when village housing starts were at an all-time high, as were subdivision applications.  Between building permits and subdivision plans, about 1,000 acres of property were protected by our five acre zoning at that time from developers wanting to build tract homes.

“Requiring special use permits for larger horse boarding operations mean the end of boarding in Barrington Hills” No it won’t.  It just means boarding facilities over a certain size will need the approval of adjacent neighbors.

Under the 2014 boarding ordinance, a developer of a boarding facility can do just about whatever they wish, without any regard for neighboring property owners’ desires for peace, privacy or possible line of sight objections from their homes.

Considering that a homeowner must supply significant documentation to apply for a special use permit to construct even a small pond, it seems incomprehensible, and inconsistent that a large boarding operation can construct an arena larger than the size of the dwelling on a property and not be subject to such scrutiny.

 “There have been no complaints under the new boarding codes” Well, when all the residential rights are stripped from people living adjacent to or near boarding facilities, so too are their grounds for complaints.

In order for a noise complaint to be addressed, the disturbance from the facility must be heard from inside the neighboring home.  So, essentially, a neighbor is driven inside their house and is not free to enjoy their own property from their deck, or must keep their windows closed if the activity next door is too loud.

Plus, non-equestrian residents (and even some equestrians) are often discouraged from complaining, due to the overly aggressive and intimidating demeanor of many of the most zealous equestrians.

Summary:  The time and energy to refute the misleading and false information we’ve described is of a far greater magnitude than it is for some in our community to spew it.

Unfortunately, as John Kass of the Chicago Tribune recently wrote, some people have no capacity for shame, so we’ll continue to endeavor to provide facts, not fiction, not fable and not nag’s tales.

-The Observer

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »