City of Harbor Springs Planning Commission 1 15 2025

Detailed briefing

Harbor Springs Planning Commission — January 15, 2025 ATTENDEES: Commissioners Mark Finkelstein, Barry Luscardi, Bob Buckner, Jeannie Benjamin, Vanessa Warren, Kenny Stewart, Tony Johnson, Chip Everest and Garen, whose surname is inconsistently transcribed; Avery Hoffman was absent. Karen Onfield spoke during public comment. • Bob Buckner was elected Planning Commission chair after a roll-call vote. Vanessa Warren was then elected vice chair through a separate roll-call vote. Both motions passed. • The commission approved its minutes after correcting the spelling of a commissioner’s name. It also approved the proposed 2026 meeting schedule. Staff described it as the existing third-Thursday schedule, with application deadlines set in the preceding month to allow time for staff and consultant review. • No changes were made to the Planning Commission bylaws. Staff said the bylaws receive an annual legal review and no revisions were recommended. Members discussed public participation rules, including whether the stated three-minute limit applies specifically to public hearings rather than general public comment. Karen Onfield encouraged the commission to use its discretion to clarify public concerns and identify recurring community themes when time allows. • Members asked to revisit two disputed zoning subjects: downtown building height and planned-development qualifying standards. The chair proposed starting with building height and distributing prior correspondence and analysis so commissioners can review the competing positions. Members suggested handling the two subjects at separate meetings because of their complexity. • Staff warned that upcoming agendas may not be light. Two applications were expected for the next meeting, another application may follow, and the commission must begin work on updated sign regulations. Staff said some sign-code changes are necessary because of court decisions governing how signs may be regulated. • The commission discussed earthmoving and cleanup at a site referred to as “Property X.” Staff said the owner had not initially contacted the city, but staff visited the site and then spoke with the owner. Staff understood that debris would be removed, topsoil restored and the property seeded until a development proposal is submitted. No current development plan or tentative approval was reported. Future city review will depend on the project’s scope and structure. Worth watching: • Whether building-height review is placed on the next agenda and supporting documents are distributed beforehand. • What development proposal eventually emerges for Property X and whether grading or drainage review is triggered. • Whether a county soil-erosion permit exists for the current site work; the meeting did not resolve this. Upcoming: Site-plan applications, possible building-height discussion and future sign-code work are expected, but no specific meeting date was stated. Why it matters: The commission is setting its leadership and work plan while revisiting contested zoning rules and monitoring a prominent property before any formal development application arrives.

No open public follow-ups are linked to this meeting yet.