VILLAGE OF BARRINGTON HILLS

PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING

NOVEMBER 2, 2005

 

 

 

A Special Meeting of the Barrington Hills Plan Commission was called to order by Chairman Bosworth at 7:30 p.m.

 

Plan Commissioners Present:                 Kenneth W. Bosworth, Chairman

                                                            Lou Anne Majewski

                                                            Thomas Roeser

                                                            Michael Schmechtig

                                                            David M. Stieper

 

                                 Absent:                Peter Grande

                                                            Patrick Hennelly

                                                            Joseph Messer

                                                            James O’Donnell

 

The Attendance Sheet is attached and made part of these Minutes.

 

 

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT:  Chairman Bosworth stated that the purpose of this meeting was for the Commission to provide comments to Lee Brown of Teska Associates, Inc. regarding the public hearing and present changes in preparation of the November 7th public hearing.  The goal is to have the amendment approved within the next two meetings so that consideration of its approval may be brought before the Village Board at their November 21st meeting.

 

Mr. Brown suggested talking about general concerns first before going through the actual text. 

 

An equestrian map was presented by Dan Lundmark, Chairman of the Equestrian Commission which deleted from the previously considered map the exact location of the Riding Club plus that of two other private lots.

 

Chairman Bosworth asked for the Commissioners’ comments on the subject of clustered housing.   He thought it did not reflect the character of the Village, and was interested in what the public comments as well as those of the Development Commission would be on the subject.  Mr. Brown first stated that this type of housing cannot occur without a planned development overlay and zoning district, limited to particular circumstances on peripheral land within the Village in context of its surroundings.  He saw it as a possible tool that would allow growth flexibility in land use without a change in density, referring to Page 38 of the draft covering Focus Areas Seven and Eight.  He added that these practices need not be just for clustered homes, making reference to a conservation design, and that they can be applicable without modifying the five acre minimum. 

 

Commissioner Schmechtig thought clustering could be left in as long as it was understood that it was just a consideration.  He especially liked the conservation concept as opposed to retention/detention basins.  He also thought that when clustering is allowed, that the home design should be more conservative in size.  Commissioner Majewski agreed, because it would allow for open vistas and preservation of natural characteristics.  Commissioner Stieper thought this section should also be left in, but was not in favor of it applying to any parcels other than those on the peripheral.  He was concerned that this would affect larger conservations areas within the Village.  Mr. Brown responded that Zoning would be authorized to issue a special use permit to allow for a PUD (planned unit development).  He also pointed out that, unlike the previous Plan, the new Plan specifically indicates densities throughout the Village. Commissioner Roeser asked what the minimum size is currently for PUD consideration.  Robert Kosin said it was 60 acres.  Commissioner Roeser also thought the Plan should be more specific regarding setbacks.  Mr. Brown said that determination is made by Zoning.

 

Trustee Knopp noted that when it comes to density the Village is not willing to accept common ownership of land to make up the aggregate number of lots on a parcel.   He was not opposed to having the cluster design included in the Plan, but could not envision some other features as ever being applicable, specifically citing parking lots.  He also questioned including the conservation design, believing that could be addressed by the Commission and Board with their ability to customize individual plans.  Mr. Brown felt justified in including the parking lots, as it gave direction to the limited number of commercial sites in the Village, but agreed to delete Practice 9. 

 

When asked if this Plan had an affect on property within 1-1/2 miles of the Village, Mr. Brown replied that it would be to review and influence the subdivision of property but not its zoning.

 

Beth Mallen, Chairman of the Communications Committee, stressed the interdependence of all the surrounding communities with each other.  Barbara Kemp, a member of that same committee, also talked about that impact, especially in terms of water quality and quantity, traffic, schools, and shared values.  She was asked to prepare a statement addressing those concerns for possible inclusion in the amendment.

 

Chairman Bosworth questioned the need for what he saw as extensive coverage of the watersheds in “Environmental Corridors.”  Mr. Brown said he thought maintaining the watersheds as a significant element emphasized the fact that the Plan is based on the physical nature of the community and its underlying sensitivity to that environment, and is very influential for the reasoning behind land use designations.  He said that perhaps the watersheds could also be referenced in some of the Focus areas.  Trustee Knoop thought it advisable to mention the fact that one of East Dundee’s primary wells has gone dry.  Commissioner Stieper agreed with the importance of emphasizing the watersheds and thought it should be included as a prominent public health concern.

 

The Commission then reviewed the draft page by page.  The following are the highlights of that discussion:

 

Preface:  It was suggested adding back to this section a paragraph on interdependence and possibly a reference to water quantity and quality/

 

Introduction / Existing Conditions:  Delete the words “Equestrian” and “Estate” in the Land Use Classifications.  Following that, delete the last sentence in the 3rd paragraph, adding “As owners retire or pass away, any change in use of these farms should be consistent with the Village policies in this Plan.”   In Water Resources, include a reference to the Water Resource Committee of BACOG.

 

Policy Framework / Vision:  Add “and there would be pressure on the quality and quantity of the water” to the 2nd last sentence in the 3rd paragraph.  The order of the objectives in Ecology was rearranged:  1 was changed to 3, 2 to 5, 3 to 1, 4 to 2 and 6 to 4.  The order was also rearranged in Community Character: 1 to 2, 2 to 3 and 3 to 1.  References to bridle path were changed to equestrian trail.  Also add “bridges” to #8; delete “The Village must” from #14.  Under Community Services deletions were made from #3 (Barrington Countryside Association and the Barrington Hills Conservation Trust) and from #5, deleting all references as shown, and adding “equestrian clubs, the Barrington Hills Conservation Club and other existing organizations.”  Under Finance add another objective: “3. Commit to the use of best practices in the management of Village affairs,” with the numbers of all subsequent objectives moved down one number.  In Overall Strategy it was agreed to add to this section previously deleted language that had been in the Preface and to also update statistics in the 2nd paragraph.

 

A Context for Planning / Community Character:  Add “Algonquin Commons” and also possibly comments from Barbara Kemp of the Communications Committee.  It is in this section that “interdependence” should be stressed.  Community Services in the 4th paragraph delete Fox Valley Hunt Club and add “District” to the Barrington Park reference.  Also add Lake in the Hills to the fire protection districts.

 

Environmental Corridors and the watersheds were discussed previously at this meeting.

 

Land Use – Focus Area Six add “subsurface aquifer” after “floodplain” in the 3rd sentence of the 3rd paragraph.  Add another key feature:  Protection of the ground water aquifer.  Focus Area Nine:  Delete the 2nd and 3rd sentence, replacing it with the following recommended verbage from Trustee Smith:  At the present time there are no clear long-term plans for further development of the Forest Preserve District property within the Village of Barrington Hills.  Because the Forest Preserve District is such a large land holder whose open space is critical to the character of the area, the Village should work closely with the Forest Preserve District to insure the long-term plans for their property are in keeping with the Village’s Comprehensive Plan.”

 

Roads and Trails / Roadway Functions and Improvements:   List State Route 59 as an arterial rather than collector.  Scenic Roadways should include the statement that the purpose for designated scenic roadways is the preservation of the existing scenic character of the Village.

 

There were other minor corrections brought to Mr. Brown’s attention, that he so noted.

 

The revisions would be presented at the public hearing on November 7th, and another Special Meeting was scheduled for November 14th at which time the Commission would consider the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and review the Country Creek preliminary plat.

 

Chairman Bosworth advised that he met with members of the Development Commission and gave an update on Plan Commission goals.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. after being so moved and seconded.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Lou Anne Majewski

Recording Secretary