7.14.25 Sand Dunes, Duplexes, ADU's in Residential Zones
Join the Planning Commission in discussions 7.17.25 at 5:30 p.m. City Hall
Brief
Planning Commission: Meets at 5:30 p.m., July 17; and at a Special Meeting on July 31, at 5:30 p.m. Zoom YouTube.
The agenda for that meeting can be found here on the City of Harbor Springs website. The discussion of residential districts - R-1-A, R-1-B, R-1-C,R-1-E & AR.
The focus will be on Article #2 (Zoning Districts and Map); Article #3 (Regulated Uses and Dimensions); Article #4 (Overlay Districts); an update and the Redline of Article #10 (Land Development Options), and discussion of upcoming meeting schedules. One scheduled ADU application will be for the addition of an Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)/Guest House. This will be the applicant’s second public meeting. Learn how the ADU process works in Harbor Springs.
Details
Can an update of the 2005 Zoning Code fix risks, errors and omissions? Yes. Can an update be future forward, and offer protections and slow growth the old code cannot? Yes, and like Tom Graham says, “Council wants a suggested Zoning Code, not a “New” Code. If it isn’t broken it doesn’t need fixing, they tried the new code last year.” The added density “by right” and the raising of building heights of downtown buildings were rejected by the voters.
The Mayor ran on the platform of liking Harbor Springs “just the way it is.”
What Mayor Graham is saying is something we can do. Let’s choose rules and regulations that make the most sense for Harbor Springs, not proposed by State of Michigan guidelines, Pure Michigan campaigns, or others.
“If you want your town to look a certain way, you have to speak up now.” says Beckett & Raeder City Planner John Iacoangeli.
Now
A few of today’s Planning Commissioners are beginning to realize what many Harbor Springs residents have always known: good neighborhoods grow slowly. By attending the Planning Commission meetings, your voices will emphasize that Harbor Springs has evolved over time, not all at once.
Recently, zoning moved in a different direction. The now-repealed Zoning Code #439 brought in a sense of uniformity that didn’t fit Harbor Springs. These approaches were modeled after big-city planning—designed to fight sprawl, reduce car dependence, or address exclusion—but they clash with the scale, character, existing walkability and spirit of our small town. That #439 Zoning Code was voted down by a majority of voters in November 2024.
What are the big issues for the next meetings? Duplexes have become a focal point in Harbor Springs. Again, questions remain about growth, density, neighborhood character, and how we plan for the future. These are the same questions many residents, including We Love Harbor Springs, have been raising throughout the zoning process.
Thankfully, the 2005 Zoning Code, which remains in effect today, offers a more balanced and flexible foundation, one that’s better aligned with Harbor Springs’ unique identity, as Mayor Graham alluded to above.
Under the 2005 Zoning Code, single-family homes are allowed “by right” in every neighborhood except the Central Business District (CBD). Duplexes, by contrast, are only allowed “by right” in a handful of zoning districts: R-2, RM, ROS, T (which the Planning Commission is eliminating), B-1, and B-2.
But that doesn’t mean duplexes are off the table in other residential zones. In fact, the 2005 zoning code includes a path for property owners to request permission for a duplex in almost any neighborhood through a process called Special Land Use, or SLU.
The SLU process isn’t a loophole. It’s a deliberate mechanism built into the zoning code that allows for flexibility while maintaining control. If a property owner can meet the criteria outlined in Article 21 of the code—such as compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, sufficient parking and utilities, and reasonable design—they can petition the Planning Commission of nine members for approval. If the Planning Commission agrees that the proposal meets all requirements, they can vote to allow the project. It’s not automatic—it takes six Planning Commissioner votes and includes neighbor input before the vote— and it’s a real and meaningful tool for dialogue.
The bigger picture. As Harbor Springs faces growing pressures—from rising housing costs to workforce shortages to lack of trades to tourism and short-term rental impacts—there’s a natural temptation by local government to “do something” or “change things”.
Please read the rest of this story on our website: Read More
Where’s the Communication?
From the very beginning, We Love Harbor Springs, and many others, have said the same thing: If the Chair of the Planning Commission and his nine member commission is going to consider zoning changes that affect specific neighborhoods, you need to communicate directly with the people who live there. That means contacting property owners. That means holding neighborhood-specific meetings. That means making it clear—early on—that the Planning Commission is actively discussing changes that could impact your home. Please hold these meetings now, not later.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t happened since the beginning of the conversations about districts and use. How about a petition to request the City Council to empower the City Assessor to notify specific parcel owners in a letter that ‘your parcel is being discussed; be aware; be informed; changes may affect your land use.’? This winter’s Town Halls and Listening sessions were open to all property owners, but we don’t recall anyone reaching out to these specific property owners, and as we surmise, it doesn't appear that it will happen now. We have a couple of vital issues coming up:
The meeting on Thursday, July 17th, will be about residential areas and the PC wanting to CHANGE the zoning district in the AR zones. Property owners in areas being considered for rezoning include parts of Arbor, Ottawa, and Lake Streets, as well as parcels near the Bluff.
And discussion if ADU’s and Duplex’s can be added in more or ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
During the drafting of the regulations, property owners can provide valuable local knowledge and insights into the practical application and potential impacts of proposed rules. Engaging them during the drafting process can lead to better-designed and more equitable regulations. Neighbors know neighbors.
This kind of delay, waiting until everything is “locked in” before telling neighborhoods what’s being proposed, defeats the purpose of community engagement. The time to involve residents is before decisions are made, not after.
It’s also worth noting that this isn’t just about process, it’s about trust. If people feel left out, or blindsided, it makes it harder to build consensus or move forward with any kind of change. That’s why meaningful communication has to be proactive, not reactive.
We believe that each neighborhood deserves a seat at the table when the future of their block is being debated. Until the city commits to that kind of engagement, up front and across the board, it’s hard to say this has been a transparent or inclusive process.
A few local voices collected from the community
Are single-family neighborhoods going to be protected? That’s the question, and the answer will shape what we pass down to our children, and their children.
As residents said in response to our questions in a recent newsletter:
“When we moved to HS in 1996, we were told there are strict rules on what can be built in town. We were told our little town would remain quaint during our lifetime. I understand ‘progress’ — but not like this.”
“How about protecting single-family districts in our small town?”
“I am against multi-family dwellings in our immediate neighborhood. Unless the City does a utility study, taxpayers shouldn’t accept any zoning that increases density and strains water, sewer, electricity, or roads.”
“We share our neighbors’ concerns. Parking, noise, trash — all are likely outcomes if neighbors can’t prevent a duplex. ADUs are the same.”
“Having a friend or family member living full-time in your backyard brings the same problems.”
“I’d like to keep duplexes and ADUs as SLU (Special Land Use). I’d be worried about parking. Not crazy about more concrete.”
“SLU’s everywhere is not the answer.”
“City planners are heading in the wrong direction. I’m absolutely against allowing duplexes in all districts — it hurts existing home values and the ‘charm’ of HS. I’m especially disturbed by including Glenn Drive!”
“I believe in the SLU process. If a homeowner truly needs a second family unit, it should be reviewed with clear criteria and neighborhood input. A ‘yes’ is not automatic — lot size and other factors matter.”
“Single-family properties were bought and sold with the understanding they stay single-family.”
“More residents? I’m opposed to overcrowding single-family neighborhoods.”
“Parking demands? Every owner should handle parking within their own lot — no using the street for private overflow.”
“Public road parking should never count as private parking.”
“Driveways are often concrete — zoning should mention water-permeable surfaces.”
“As much green space as possible, as little concrete as needed.”
“Renters often have less buy-in. What works here are seasonal rentals. Resort demand will always drive that.”
“I would NOT be happy with any duplex built in our neighborhood. You’ve given all the reasons why.”
“We need decision-makers who stand up for the people of HS and our needs.”
Another Issue to Ponder: Development in the Sand Dunes
For example, the issue of protecting our sand dunes in Harbor Springs was first raised by a resident at the June 5th meeting, and is a subject that needs attention.
Our dunes within the 1.3 square miles of Harbor Springs are living, breathing, fragile ecosystems. More so, residential development and interpretation of regulations are a threat to our dune ecosystems. The lack, so far, of local government interest in the dunes makes us think we may have to be much more proactively concerned about protectionism.
Adding new roads in the Glenn Drive neighborhood, excavating the dunes for more water frontage, or obtaining PUD/PD approval is a problem in which the State of Michigan will not intervene. Can all the property owners agree to take heed? With no local oversight the neighborhood has the real potential of becoming unrecognizable.
In the upcoming July 17th meeting, uses, dimensions and what is allowed to be developed in residential zones will be discussed. One neighbor said, “Policies currently in place, locally, make inappropriate standards of development on our lake side dunes easier.”
There are lawmakers trying to change Michigan’s policies. They’re proposing a system where everyone who loves our dunes—coastline residents, tourists, local governments, even the people that want to develop on them—can better come together to help the dunes and the communities nearby them to thrive. Let’s get dune protection started up in Harbor Springs by asking for dune and wetland overlays. Please attend the July 17th meeting to support this effort.
Thank you all for listening during this critical time in the zoning process. We always look forward to your comments and suggestions, both pro and con.
I am adamantly against the building of any new duplexes in our residential neighborhoods. We already have specific zones in town that permit by right or by SLU approval multi-family housing. Duplexes have been scattered throughout our residential neighborhoods....they blend in and are architecturally appropriate. They were built over time, with care and by people who have a stake in keeping the character and charm of our city. All that will change if a developer buys and builds a duplex next to single family homes. Developers have no skin in the game of protecting and preserving Harbor Springs. They are in it for the quick dollar and then they move on. Once approved to be built, we have no control over how many residents can occupy a duplex.....possibly leading to over crowding and density. This is why #439 was voted down and the Planning Commission needs to listen and consider the voices of the property owners.