Could Dropping a Density Rule Help Housing in Bar Harbor? Officials Debate, Voters Will Likely Decide in June.

Carrie Jones

Feb 13, 2026

BAR HARBOR—What initially seemed like a fast-moving meeting for the Bar Harbor Planning Board, February 4, hitched a bit when it came time to discuss area per family, a proposed change to the town’s rules that govern land use.

That phrase—area per family—is part of what can or can’t be developed on various lots in Bar Harbor.

It means the least amount of area needed by each family on a lot for each family’s dwelling unit.

It’s not about setbacks.

It’s not about minimum lot sizes.

And, according to the town’s planning department, it’s just one piece of the restrictive puzzle that keeps property owners from developing more homes on their lots.

During discussion on Thursday, February 4, some planning board members worried that unrestricted development and an increase in lodging uses could occur as a result. These specific public hearings were meant to be a step prior to the amendments going to the town council.

What the amendment would do is take away that requirement (but not other restrictions) in areas of town that are on town water and sewer or are in a growth area that’s designated by the most recent comprehensive plan (a document that sets the stage for a town’s short-term and long-term actions and goals) and was approved by voters June 2025.

Those districts are: Bar Harbor Gateway, Village Historic, Mount Desert Street Corridor District, Village Residential, Downtown Village I, Downtown Village II, Downtown Residential, Hulls Cove Business, Hulls Cove Residential Corridor, Hulls Cove Rural, Shoreland General Development I, Shoreland General Development II (Hulls Cove), Shoreland General Development III, and Educational Institution districts.

Bar Harbor Housing and Community Planner Cali Martinez has previously explained that the comprehensive plan usually lasts 10-20 years and speaks to growth areas for more homes such as downtown Bar Harbor and Hulls Cove. Both of those areas are served by the town’s infrastructure (water and sewer). More gentle density is meant to occur in Hadley Point, Salisbury Cove, and Town Hill.

One of the questions at the planning board meeting was why go below the new state minimums for area per family.

Any restriction is a restriction. Those restrictions cap what can be built, staff explained.

However, most believe that it’s unlikely that taking away the area per family will make change in housing density downtown all by itself. It is, however, a step, toward making it easier to build homes, officials have explained.

There are still restrictions such as lot coverage (and what constitutes lot coverage, which is currently things such as gravel walkways), height restrictions, setback restrictions (how far structures can be from the property lines), what is allowed in a specific zone, and parking requirements.

Some planning board members were also worried that getting rid of area per family would mean more VR-1s, which are the type of short-term rentals that are the owner’s primary residence.

Code Enforcement Officer Michael Gurtler explained that in 2025 there were a total of 615 short-term rentals. Of those, 195 are VR-1s (primary residences) and 420 VR-2s, which are capped. The current cap is calculated at just under 300 Gurtler said.

Board member Guy Dunphey asked if VR-1s have been increasing.

In 2024, there were 202; in 2025 there were 205. To have a VR-1, a home owner has to establish primary residence for more than 183 days.

“You can’t just buy a house and start it right off,” Gurtler said.

When it comes to the potential land use amendments that might come before the voters in June, Bar Harbor Planning Director Michele Gagnon said that the language is locked in from this moment on and there are no substantial changes from now on.

The public comment is not meant to be a back and forth, but a chance for the public to make statements prior to the planning board eventually voting to recommend or not recommend the changes.

During public comment, worries included that changes could potentially equate to more lodging, that the full ramifications haven’t been shown a in full narrative form and that there should be maximum build-outs shown and affordability standards tied in. Others worried that it was a hurried change.

The department is working on visuals and outreach events with the public, according to Housing and Community Planner Cali Martinez.

Some planning board members worried that the change was premature without the board having a full understanding of an overall strategy.

“I’m concerned about making changes to the LUO without having that greater understanding,” Teresa Wagner, board member, said.

She wasn’t sure if this would incentivize housing. She worried that more buildings on lots would become more vacation rentals. She was also disappointed that there was no visual for downtown residential.

Martinez stressed that these changes—and other housing changes—are mentioned in the town’s comprehensive plan as are the unique challenges for rural areas with tourism-based economies.

In order to incentivize year-round communities, there are many policies in the comprehensive plan, there is also a housing plan adopted by the town council, she said.

Vacation communities have to go above and beyond to create housing opportunities, she said. The best way to incentivize is to remove land use barriers.

Gurtler said that there were concerns about area per family in zones where there is septic rather than town sewer. However, he said, the maximum build-out on septic system is contingent on suitable soils and 20,000 square feet is the state minimum. The state uses a calculation for multiple units on one lot. The maximum is four single bedroom apartments and a two-bedroom house.

Gagnon said in some areas, the same lot that could be developed for a house could have a nursing home, a parking garage, an undertaking establishment. Nobody talks about that, she said. They all moved forward.

On March 9, the staff will present the amendments to the warrant committee.

Other potential amendments include:

Design Review Board

Chair Ruth Eveland said she was particularly excited about how it will open the doors to federal funding for projects in town.

One member of the public said she thought it looked great. Another, Ellen Grover, asked that the town clarify and simplify language for the public.

---

Campground and Campsite

---

Lodging

Speaking as a member of the public, Maureen Donnelly said she’d appreciate taking lodging out of residential areas particularly in Town Hill where she lives.

Others worried about lodging 7 and potentials that any house might be converted to one, wondering if this could create a loophole around the town’s cap on vacation rentals that are not the primary residence of owners (VR-2s).

---

LINKS TO LEARN MORE

Meeting Agenda

Proposed LUO Changes of the Town’s Website

---

Follow us on Facebook or BlueSky or Instagram. And as a reminder, you can easily view all our past stories and press releases here.

Bar Harbor Story is a mostly reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Thanks for being here with us and being part of our community too!

If you’d like to donate to help support us, you can, but no pressure! Just click here (about how you can give) or here (a direct link), which is the same as the button below.

To support The Story

If you’d like to sponsor the Bar Harbor Story, you can! Learn more here.

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING OUR COMMITMENT TO YOUR COMMUNITY