??? DIVI What is Missing, What Needs to Change, and What We Want

May 11, 2024

  WLHS provided the City Council and Planning Commission a document of what is missing, what needs to change, and what we want to review in May 2024. This document outlined feedback from the Harbor Springs community regarding the proposed zoning changes in #439. The input came from conversations, emails, public speeches, and research from the 2005 Zoning Code, Master Plans, and public volunteers. Our goal was to protect the character and charm of Harbor Springs for future generations.

April 10, 2025

Key Concern:

Protecting Harbor Springs’ unique identity, which has been a haven for families and visitors since the 1850s, its natural beauty, its historic charm, its peaceful environment, its welcoming community – that needs to be preserved.

Where we agree:

  • Simplifying the zoning code

  • Reducing the number of zones, but not all.

  • Recognizing the aging population while promoting a family-friendly community

  • Maintaining height restrictions in the Downtown District

  • Allowing second-floor residential units in the Central Business District without compromising downtown charm

  • No businesses in residential zones

  • Acknowledging that all community members, from year-round residents to seasonal ones, want what’s best for Harbor Springs.

What needs more attention:

  • Historical Preservation: The plan doesn’t address preserving Harbor Springs’ historical character, particularly in the Central Business District (CBD). Preservation 49740, a new area historical protection group will be submitting requests and asking for new zoning participation soon. 

  • Affordable Housing: Presently, there are no plans on the table for affordable housing for singles, aging adults, or working families. The city should take the lead and open discussions with willing local developers and neighboring townships to assist and collaborate. The biggest challenge will be architectural standards. Let’s discuss this before zoning becomes law.

  • Impact on Infrastructure: Zoning changes could put pressure on infrastructure, including schools, sewer, and electricity. We need to assess the expected increase in residents and homes. After the storm, these utilities should be priority #1.

  • Height Restrictions: There should be clear two story height protections in the CBD to maintain the city’s character. Heightening the downtown buildings is not a choice found in the Vision Plan or Surveys. 

  • Unified Bay Street Overlay: Homes on Bay Street are under multiple zoning districts, but they should be treated as one area and remain residential in nature.

  • Parking and Traffic: What impact will increased development have on city parking and traffic? These discussions are on-going and if the community chimes in soon, we can apply new ideas in downtown and corral the employee parking to help the merchants. 

  • Enforcement: There needs to be better enforcement of current regulations regarding unkempt properties. There must be other communities that have tacked this challenge successfully.

  • Noise: New developments should have safeguards to minimize noise and disruption for existing homeowners. Neighborhoods and Associations have different wishes. Speak to your neighbors and make plans. How do you want your neighborhood to change, improve or be protected? 

  • Future Vision:  City Council,  Planning Commission and the Community can define what the “future” of Harbor Springs should look like.

  • Architectural Style: The zoning plan lacks guidance on the desired architectural style. Should new buildings in the downtown follow a historic, residential, cottage or modern commercial look? Local developers wait to be told what to do. Let’s rely on a coalition of suggestions from everyone. Let’s avoid one developers bad taste in housing for Harbor Springs. 

  • Green Space Protection: Development threatens the natural beauty that defines Harbor Springs, contradicting the Master Plan’s emphasis on preserving open spaces -our back yards.

  • Unintended Consequences: Simplifying zoning may attract developers with designs that conflict with the city’s historic character.

 

What needs further discussion:

  1. Regionalizing the Master Plan: The city has distinct areas, such as residential lakefront and downtown. These areas need separate plans to guide future development.

  2. Revising the Planning Commission: Ensure more direct input from property owners before significant zoning changes are made.

  3. Notifying Property Owners: Property owners need to be informed about zoning changes before the City Council reviews them. There is a general misunderstanding about the proposed changes.

  4. Expanding the CBD: The proposed expansion of the CBD could negatively impact views, historic buildings, and downtown businesses. Focus on improving the existing CBD before expanding it.

  5. Preserving Height Restrictions in the CBD: The new zoning height restrictions can  be set to keep the two story downtown intact so to not block water views, views of the bluffs and diminish the small town historic charm of the downtown area.

  6. Maintaining Front Setbacks: Setbacks along Bay Street, Third Street and Main Streets should allow and protect undulating set-backs to preserve the city’s character.

  7. Keeping the Agricultural District Intact: The Agricultural District west of town should remain agricultural without being converted to a primary residential zones. The Agricultural District between Arbor and Ottawa should be a district zoning decision made by the property owners. There are 4 Districts in that area.  

  8. Maintaining the ADU Approval Process: ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units) should require special land use approval to ensure proper oversight and prevent misuse.

  9. Not Reducing Lot Widths: The proposed reduction in lot widths does not align with the community’s character. The minimum should remain at 64 feet. The neighborhood between 2nd and 4th street should not be used as a model. Each neighborhood and district should and can be unique. 

  10. Avoiding Overlays Within Districts: Overlays should be used to address specific situations, not alter entire districts

  11. Addressing Multi-Unit Dwellings Carefully: Introducing multi-unit dwellings could change the town’s character and affect property values. This needs to be carefully considered but considered for affordable housing options. 

  12. Avoiding ‘National’ Best Practices: Harbor Springs should prioritize its unique vision, rather than following cookie-cutter zoning practices suggested by the best practices of the Michigan Economic Development Corporation. We have moved forward. 

  13. Maintaining Planning Commission Involvement: The Planning Commission should remain engaged in zoning decisions to ensure consistency and quality development.

Request to the Community:
We urge the community, boards and commissions, and City Council to continue play an important role in public meetings to allow for further community discussion. This is a matter of property rights, voter involvement, and ethical decision-making. While we don’t necessarily oppose the zoning changes themselves, we believe that not rushing this process without full community support is the right approach.

Thank you,
WeLoveHarborSprings.org

 .