What would a zoning change allow?

The current zoning for most of Slabtown, R1-b, is intended for low-density residential uses, which allows for single-family homes, duplexes, accessory dwelling units and essential services.  For a detailed map of the zones, please see the Traverse City Zoning Map.

The Master Plan (page 63) calls for “New neighborhood mixed use district, or a heavily revised C-1, C-2, R2, or R-3 district to ensure compatibility.” It is unclear what “heavily revised ” means, but here is a partial list of what is allowed by those four potential future zones: 

• C1 (Office Service) allows offices, funeral services, health services, membership organizations, social services, and vacation home rentals with certain requirements. See full description

• C2 (Neighborhood Center) allows retail stores, brewpubs and other drinking establishments, restaurants, service stations, and marijuana retailers (although marijuana retailers do have many other restrictions.) See full description 

  • Both C1 and C2 allow building heights up to 45 feet (if a residential floor is included), exclusive of rooftop amenities which can add an additional 15 feet.

• R2 (Mixed-Density Residential) allows building heights up to 35 feet and allows two dwelling units per parcel; art galleries; multi-family housing and offices under certain conditions (typically in existing, older buildings); and “other similar uses” as approved by the Planning Commission. See full description

• R3 (Multiple-Family Dwelling) allows building heights up to 45 feet and allows multi-family housing, coffee houses and restaurants under certain conditions, rooming houses See full description

Another thing that is unclear from the Master Plan is how far this new zone would extend. Would it just be Bay Street itself or would it carry over some distance into the north-south streets? 

What are the potential negative impacts? 

Traffic. We saw during the construction of Grandview Parkway how many cars were speeding through our neighborhood. Addition of “drive-by” businesses like coffee shops to Bay Street would result in increased traffic from people that consider north-south Slabtown streets to be thoroughfares and not residential streets. Extra traffic undermines safety, reduces walkability, and exacerbates road disrepair. 

Parking. Since 2020, Traverse City allows residential buildings to be built without adequate parking for the residents. This results in a large amount of street parking near those buildings. Randolph Street near Division Street has become an example of this. Commercial businesses also increase the number parked cars on the street. An example of this is Maple Street between Front Street and 5th Street. Having an excessive number of cars parked on the street limits visibility at stop signs, which causes a safety issue and reduces walkability. 

Crowding of parks and beaches. While these properties are obviously available to all people, having a lot more people living nearby will change the character of resources such as Darrow Park, Ashton Park and Slabtown Beach that are used by residents and local schools. 

General character and charm of the neighborhood. The Slabtown neighborhood is a highly desired location because it has a cohesive neighborhood quality of life. That would be seriously compromised by changing the makeup of the historic neighborhood with commercial development and larger multi-family structures that do not fit in with the character of Slabtown. 

What are the supposed positive impacts?

The Master Plan lacks the methodology or reasoning that led to the conclusion that Bay Street be added as a Transitional Neighborhood. The analysis of the existing zoning, existing land use, to the future land use designation, and future zoning is not explained in the plan.

However, we can only assume that the planners want to make space for more businesses and/or housing.

As far as businesses, there is a strong sentiment against adding businesses to Bay Street among local residents. The residents have all the services they need, including commercial borders on Front and Division streets. There are plenty of vacancies downtown for offices and commercial enterprises. Why create more commercial space when current commercial space downtown needs taxpayer support?

Regarding housing, the kind of housing that would be built with an unobstructed bay view is not the kind of housing that is in short supply in Traverse City. It would absolutely not be affordable or even moderate, and there are already plenty of expensive condos for sale in the city.

What is a Transitional neighborhood? Isn’t it meant to be a good thing for residential areas?

Here is how the Master Plan (page 40) defines transitional neighborhoods:

“Transitional Neighborhoods are intended to function as a mixing between the more defined residential neighborhoods and the non-residential areas that provide amenities to those living in the neighborhoods. This transition is achieved through a varied composition of residential types, local neighborhood-scale commercial uses, and offices. Transitional Neighborhoods are intended to provide a gradual scaling down from the higher intensity of commercial areas and the low intensity residential areas. Additionally, the Transitional Neighborhoods support commercial uses that may not be appropriate on the high-trafficked streets of the Commercial Gateways and benefit from a more moderate-intensity environment (bakeries, coffee shops, bookstores, thrift stores, etc.). Any changes to the areas identified as Transitional Neighborhood will need to be considered on an individual basis to make sure the uses and dimensional standards are not detrimental to the adjacent residential zones and serve to benefit the neighborhoods rather than detract from them.” 

First, Bay Street does not need a buffer. There is no non-residential area on the other side of Bay Street other than Grandview Parkway. While Northern Slabtown residents certainly want to be separated from Grandview Parkway as much as possible, adding a commercial zone as a “buffer” actually increases the “intensity”. It’s an illogical proposition to increase traffic, via multi-family housing and commercialization, to achieve a buffer. 

Second, supporting new commercial uses such as bakeries and thrift stores is not necessary in Slabtown and is directly opposed by the residents. There are already plenty of commercial services within walking distance of Slabtown, including on two sides of the neighborhood (Division Street and Front Street). 

The final sentence in the quoted section above was added to the Master Plan after feedback from Slabtown residents. While we appreciate the sentiment, we would suggest that we could avoid any detraction from the Slabtown neighborhood by simply not calling Bay Street a Transitional Neighborhood. 

Bay Street was for some reason the only area singled out in the Master Plan to change from only residential zoning to commercial zoning. We simply do not think this is appropriate. 

Aren’t there already businesses on Bay Street? So what’s the big change? 

The Master Plan’s position is that the Bay Street corridor between Division and M72 currently contains several commercial non-conforming parcels, so it therefore makes the most sense to rezone the entire corridor commercial in order to create more uniformity.

While the existing neighbors acknowledge and positively accept the existing two commercial non-conforming properties, it does not imply a desire for more (as evidenced by the listening session and survey results). The current non-conforming properties are low-impact and do not disturb the pace of the residential neighborhood. 

Wasn’t the proposed change a result of public comment? 

The Master Plan says that the proposed zoning changes were prepared in response to comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the past two years of the master planning process.

Despite the implications from the planning department that Slabtown residences expressed a desire for “perhaps a dry cleaner or a coffee shop”, the allowance for additional commercial activity along the corridor is neither desired nor sought by the neighborhood or community at large. The proposed zoning change is exactly the opposite of the expressed wishes of Slabtown residents. 

There are very detailed documents linked from the City web site that list the results of the survey and listening session that were supposed to be the public’s method of weighing in on the Master Plan. There are 18 pages of comments and they show a virtually unanimous desire for no new development, no new multi-family properties, no weekly rentals, basically no change to the residential feel of the neighborhood. Many residents mention existing problems with traffic and parking that will only get worse if Bay Street is commercialized.

In addition to the feedback in these documents, over 300 Slabtown residents signed a petition[link later] to change the Master Plan, which is a strong indicator of public opinion. 

Notice in this TC Ticker article how the planning department claims the Master Plan put neighborhood preservation in the forefront of its effort and that it was based on residents’ input. Then look at the listening session and survey. This shows the disconnect between the residents and city government. It would appear that they do not have the residents’ best interest in mind.

Isn’t the Master Plan just a suggestion for the future?

The City’s position is that the zoning changes proposed by the draft master plan are merely suggestions and do not carry the force of law. Therefore, residents should not be concerned that the zoning changes recommended by the Master Plan will actually be adopted and made into law by the City Commission.

The City Planner would have us believe that, after much energy, effort and time provided by engaged residents of Traverse City, and at the significant cost to the taxpayers of Traverse City, that the Planning Commission have approved a Master Plan that carries the weight of a whisper. This notion is highly disingenuous. Despite multiple insinuations that master plans often go underutilized and that their suggestions are often either forgotten or ignored, these assertions are not only contrary to widely distributed municipal planning data, they contradict the very need for and purpose of this and every other Planning Department.

Master plans, along with all other regulations proposed by the Planning Commission carry the weight, not of law, but of potential precedent. Master plans have been brought up in legal arguments in local court cases between developers and townships.

When the official rezoning of Bay Street is presented to the City Commission, or a request for a non- conforming use is proposed by a developer, the fact that rezoning is proposed in the Master Plan will carry significant weight. All of the public pushback will have been forgotten. Therefore, it is important to have it removed from the Master Plan rather than just hope that nothing comes of it.

Bay Street used to be a commercial district back in the day, so why not return it to that?

It is true that in the late 19th century and through the first half of the 20th century, business of many types did exist in the Bay Street corridor between what is now the intersection at M72 and Division Street. The removal of commercialization and industrialization of the 2-mile Traverse City Bayfront is the most significant placemaking and conservation story in the City’s history. The reclamation of the Open Space, removal of the Traverse City Power Plant and acquisition of the bayside Smith Barney building led to the 2007 “Your Bay, Your Say” vision planning process to conceptualize how to activate the reclaimed bayfront to facilitate the use of the bayfront. The “Your Bay, Your Say” vision led to the 2010 Bayfront Plan. These plans were built upon the vision and values of the community. Implementation of the plans resulted in a park overhaul for Clinch Park, the Cass Street pedestrian access tunnel improvements, TART Trail connectivity, enhanced pedestrian access and safety crossings of Grandview Parkway, undergrounding of the utility power lines, bayside trail extension to M-72, Slabtown Beach access and enhancements, and more.

The City zoning, for years, has reflected these community values such as the building height step down in the downtown districts, with lower building heights along the bayfront and the residential zoning in Slabtown along the bayfront. The Transitional Neighborhood designation on Bay Street with the future zoning of “new neighborhood mixed-use district or a heavily revised C-1, C-2, R-2, or R-3 district” is not in keeping with the bayfront preservation story.

Are you attacking the members of the Planning Commission?

We have no desire to personally attack or disrespect any member of the Planning Commission or City Commission. When comments criticizing the Master Plan have been made in the past, one response has been that the Planning Commission put a lot of work into it, and that their morale is low because they are being criticized. As a public servant, you should expect to have your work critiqued by the public, especially when your work product is clearly in opposition to documented public opinion (listening session and survey). You should be able to listen to valid criticism with an open mind and without defensiveness. We ask that all emails sent to the Planning and City Commissions about this issue be respectful and professional.

What can Slabtown residents do?

1. Write an email. It's important to get as many people as possible to send messages and show them that we are 100% committed to this. Please see some guidelines here.

2. Attend Planning Commission and City Commission meetings and speak on this topic. The list of upcoming meetings can be found on the Meetings page of the City web site. Seeing citizens speak in person has a meaningful impact on commissioners.

3. Join the private Facebook group STown Action for additional updates.