Voters can learn more at two events tomorrow and will have the ultimate decision about this and other proposed changes.

Carrie Jones

Mar 11, 2026

The Bar Harbor Story is generously sponsored by Restaurant Barn.

---

BAR HARBOR—This Thursday, locals can head to either the the Town Council chambers at the Bar Harbor Municipal Building or the College of the Atlantic to talk to planning staff about five potential proposed land use changes that could tweak the shape of land use in Bar Harbor.

The LUO is the local law in each town that regulates the use of land in specific areas or zones. It determines things such as what activities can occur in different areas, the minimum size of a lot, how close things can be built to property lines (setbacks), and more.

The potential changes deal with reshaping the design review board’s ordinance, moving a church out of one district and into another, but also changing some lodging definitions and where the can be placed, removing one type of lodging from the town. And finally, the town could get rid of the area-per-family restriction in its growth areas.

The Bar Harbor Planning Department presented five proposed land use amendments to the town’s Warrant Committee, Monday, March 9. The committee will vote on March 30 to recommend or not and that vote will appear on the June ballot. The Planning Board’s recommendations (which will likely occur at its April 1 meeting) will also appear on the ballot.

The changes will go before town voters for their decisions on June 9.

---

MINIMUM AREA PER FAMILY

Area per family is the amount of land the town requires for each housing unit on a property. In the Village Residential District that is currently 10,000 square feet for each unit or family.

Proponents of getting rid of that requirement say that the current requirements keep owners on small lots from converting garages to apartments, prevents duplexes and other development, and that this results in keeping families with lower incomes out of homes.

The belief is that the removal of the restriction will allow people to build more dwelling units on less land and renovate existing structures.

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.

“Land values in downtown tend to be valued higher than the actual residential structures,” Martinez said.

One of the questions at the Warrant Committee meeting echoed that of the Planning Board, which was why go below the new state minimums for area per family. The requirement would be zero in designated growth areas.

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 major changes in housing 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 currently includes 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.

Martinez shared several slides that show current housing buildout and future potential in those zones as well as images of current properties that have morphed from single-family residences to multiple units.

“It’s not a cure all. It’s not the panacea,” Martinez told Warrant Committee members, but a step toward more types of housing to support a thriving community.

Martinez said that Bar Harbor has to do everything possible to meet its housing needs.

There are also a couple districts, Code Enforcement Officer Michael Gurtler said, with a minimum 1200 square foot area per family currently. This is below the new state mandated minimum, but not zero.

Warrant Committee member Carol Chappell wondered about properties in those areas not on town water and sewer and how it could impact the watershed and if the state could override the changes if there’s an environmental impact to the Northeast Creek watershed.

“It seems important to me to protect all the water we can at this point and see what the state is going to come up with,” Chappell said.

She also suggested that the proposal be held until November so that it could be fine tuned, but also would allow the town to postpone a decision until other state legislation either passes or doesn’t.

The council is the only body that can postpone the vote.

“Everybody wants to support affordable housing,” Warrant Committee member Kevin Knopp said, but some downtown residents worry about density and potential crowding. “Zero feels like you’re setting it to an extreme. I get a little wary when you go to an extreme. Sometimes extremes can increase the probability of an unintended consequence.”

He also wondered about wording that expresses it must fit in with the character of the neighborhood and who decides what that is, saying it’s subjective.

Martinez asked what extreme meant to Knopp and others.

“Going all the way to zero is an extreme position to take,” he said.

Gurtler then asked what Knopp felt was too much density.

“I picture a lot of houses that are taking up a large of percentage of their lot with maybe ten feet between them. A lot of cars. A lot of parking. A lot more traffic. A lot of people. A lot more people walking dogs. It’s all those things. A lot of noise,” Knopp said.

Gurtler replied that what would change is the number of units, not necessarily the number of houses. Because of lot coverage, he said, you might not be able to have the same size structure because of parking required for units.

“What you have now is a lot with one family. And you’re saying you want to have the same lot with eight or six,” Knopp said.

Knopp stressed he was worried about unintended consequences and making things more dense. If it’s not going to change things much, he asked than why do it?

Martinez said that most lots in downtown residential are small and most people will likely renovate so their home can have another unit or add an addition.

Charles Sidman said he was recently on a tour with a developer of tiny houses no bigger than 400 square feet. Is that a possible direction, he wondered. If it is then they should address it.

Martinez said this would provide a lot more flexibility for tiny homes.

Gurtler said that tiny homes are currently allowed in Bar Harbor. It has to be less than 450 square feet. There is a minimum size for a bedroom and a living area. That would be 200 square feet.

Area per family doesn’t relate to the size of the dwelling, he stressed it’s area of land per unit.

---

HOLY REDEEMER

The Holy Redeemer changes would take the Mount Desert Street church out of one district and into another, which would allow it to have increased lot coverage and reduced setbacks.

---

DESIGN REVIEW

Speaking from the public, Planning Board Vice Chair Ruth Eveland said the design review board has wanted to rewrite this article for years.

“It’s a much more coherent read,” Eveland said of the changes. She said it is also more user-friendly.

The new proposed language being consistent with state and federal standards allows opportunity for preservation money and grants.

---

CAMPGROUNDS AND CAMPSITES

The changes are meant to help streamline and clarify aspects of how the town governs individual private campsites.

The areas that had been requested or where it currently exists are the areas that are still in there.

Most of the requests, Gurtler said, are from people who have vacant lots and want to be able to utilize their property. There are between 2-4 each season. They’ve avoided doing it downtown.

---

LODGING

The purpose is to clarify and standardize how lodging is defined and regulated,” Planning Director Michele Gagnon said.

The changes are also meant to establish limits on lodging size and intensity, reduce the conversion of housing to lodging uses, and apply consistent nonconformity standards across the ordinance. It comes out of the work of the town’s lodging moratorium, which is ongoing.

One use that would no longer be allowed is L1, but existing L1s could continue. It would keep L1 from being de facto short-term rentals.

Another significant change is the replacement of the term “guest room” with “guest unit” and adding a “guest capacity” factor into many of the town’s existing definitions.

Chappell said that this amendment and the campground amendment were well vetted.

---

Disclosure: Shaun Farrar, a member of the Warrant Committee, is my husband. He was not able to go to this meeting due to other obligations. He is also a contributor to the Bar Harbor Story, primarily covering Trenton and Tremont. And, finally, his views and my views are not always the same. For instance, he hates tomatoes. I think they are wonderful. He is fond of Spam. I am very much not. And so on.

---

LINKS TO LEARN MORE

With Hopes for More Housing, Bar Harbor Weighs Eliminating One Density Restriction in Growth Areas.

Carrie Jones

Feb 13

Read full story

TOWN’S LAND USE ORDINANCE

The LUO is here.

Proposed LUO Changes of the Town’s Website

To watch the video of the meeting.

---

TO CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT

• Code Enforcement Officer — Michael Gurtler
  • Email: mgurtler@barharbormaine.gov
• Planning Director — Michele Gagnon
  • Email: planner@barharbormaine.gov
• Planning & Code Enforcement Department
  • Phone: 207-288-3329

Bar Harbor’s Stewardship of Resources Projects

---

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!

Thanks for reading Bar Harbor Story! This post is public so feel free to share it.