Upcoming 3.19.26 PC Meet: Heights in Harbor Springs – A Memo by Aligned Planning Consultant Lynee Wells –

Responsibility for Height

To ensure correct decision-making, adherence to State Law and the City Charter, and to avoid placing the City and its inhabitants and taxpayers at risk. While we are going to discuss adding parking for consensus, we’d like the three other items, PD’s; Heights/Grades; & final language approval of the ARC to the deep dive that was agreed upon at the Planning Commissions first January Meeting.

We believe we are asking exactly the right question—and this is where the conversation or argument becomes protective, not oppositional.

Below are three worst-case scenarios, written so they can be spoken aloud or briefly written, and framed around why protection matters in Harbor Springs, not why planners are “wrong.”

These scenarios explain why Beckett & Raeder’s “modern zoning / future-ready” approach conflicts with what the community is asking for now.

---

In Harbor Springs, the risk isn’t dramatic overdevelopment—it’s incremental approvals that permanently change scale while technically following the rules.

Clear height language isn’t about stopping development—it’s about making sure what gets built still feels like Harbor Springs after the permits are closed.

1. HEIGHTS: “Out-of-Scale by Right”

Worst-case scenario:
Height standards become flexible enough—through PDs or administrative interpretations—that homes or buildings technically comply with the code but are visually and contextually out of scale with their neighborhoods.

What that looks like in practice:

• A structure meets height limits on paper but dominates adjacent homes due to massing, roof form, or grade manipulation
• Neighbors are told, “It meets the ordinance,” even though the outcome clearly violates neighborhood character
• Once built, there is no remedy

Why this matters in Harbor Springs:
Height is not just a number here—it’s about views, sunlight, privacy, and the human scale of streets that were never designed for oversized structures. Without clearer guardrails, enforcement becomes defensive instead of protective.

Plain takeaway:
If height controls aren’t precise, the code protects measurements—not neighborhoods.

---

Real Life Examples:

The “Compliant but Overwhelming” House

Scenario:
A new home technically meets the height limit, but through grade manipulation, roof form, and stacked massing, it towers over neighboring cottages.

What happens:

• The applicant measures height from the lowest allowable point or the average of the four corners
• A tall foundation + steep roof + multiple stories stay “within the number”
• Neighbors lose light, privacy, and scale—but are told it complies

Why this matters in Harbor Springs:
Many neighborhoods were built before modern height calculations existed. Without clear limits on massing, roof form, and grade, height becomes a math exercise instead of a character safeguard.

Gauge question for the code:

Does the height standard protect neighborhood scale—or just numeric compliance?

The View Corridor Loss

Scenario:
A structure meets height limits but blocks long-standing public or neighbor views of the harbor, lake, or bluff—views that were assumed protected by custom, not written rule.

What happens:

• No explicit view or step-back standards exist
• Height is measured, approved, and irreversible
• Long-considered “shared” views disappear overnight

Why this matters in Harbor Springs:
Views are part of the town’s identity and property expectations, even when informal. Once lost, they cannot be restored, and resentment lingers long after permits are closed.

Gauge question for the code:

Does the height language recognize Harbor Springs’ topography and view sensitivity?

The Downtown “One More Story” Effect

Scenario:
A downtown building seeks an additional story or taller mass through interpretation, PD flexibility, or ARC review—arguing economic viability or consistency with “future vision.”

What happens:

• A small increase is approved as reasonable
• That approval becomes precedent
• Within a few years, downtown scale quietly shifts upward

Why this matters in Harbor Springs:
Downtown is compact and human-scaled. Even small height increases compound quickly and permanently alter street character, shadows, and the pedestrian experience.

Gauge question for the code:

Does the height standard prevent incremental escalation—or enable it?

At the next Planning Commission meeting on March 19th, 2026 the Commissioners will re-start the discussion on height. Please attend to participate. Included here is Lynee Wells report on the importance of making sure height, scale and neighborhood character is not lost, but protected in our new zoning code. If you show up and have an opinion, the Commissioners will listen. Thank you. 

February 10, 2026

Height Memo for Planning Commission 2.2.26

3 Pages – Heights and regulations in CBD and in Residential neighborhoods vary in many ways, many are still confused why we want to review the Heights subject again. So for many of us that are participating in the zoning process. Lynee Wells provides us with details that makes it simpler to understand. Hope this report is helpful. Below the letter you will also find the Height questions poised in September/October 2025 – From the 60 Issues Questions #22-27

Please join the Planning Commissioners meetings on Thursdays once a month to learn more.