Appendix
A
SUTTONS BAY TOWNSHIP MASTER PLAN
Interview Questions
1. What is the
person’s relationship to the community? Is the person a resident, business
owner, or both? How long have they been in the community?
2. What trends
in land development do you see in the community?
3. What is
encouraging development in the community? Is anything discouraging land
development?
4. How do you
see the community developing in the future? Is this development pattern
positive or negative for the community?
5. Are there
any special opportunities or threats related to the future development of the
community?
Interviewees and Responses
Trudy Galla 231/256-9812
1. Ms. Gallas’ tie to
2. The
predominant trend is the rapid turnover in open space and agricultural land use
to residential use.
3. Development
is attracted to the Township for its inland lakes, quality educational system,
proximity to employment centers in
4. Ms. Galla thinks that land will continue to be sold and split
for residential development for the next ten years or more. Then, when the area
loses the very appeal that is currently attractive to new residents, the
development industry will look for another community. This development pattern
will adversely affect the community.
5. A threat to
the community is the loss of its current charm due to widespread conversion of
open space and agricultural lands to residential development. Opportunities exist for the Township to
manage inevitable growth through use of creative development techniques such as
clustering.
Mike Oltersdorf 231/256-9829
1. Sheriff Oltersdorf is a resident of
2. Over the
years, the area has transitioned from a predominantly agricultural economy to
one that is tourism-based. Presently, the trend is the development of
recreational and rural areas to homesites for
permanent residents. The Township has become a bedroom community.
3. Development
is attracted to the Township for its quality of life: scenic beauty, excellent
schools, low crime rate, recreation- and tourist-based industry, little
industrial development, and low wages (local saying, “A view of the bay at half
the pay, or drain the bay and give me full pay”). High property values could
discourage future development. Property values have doubled in the last ten
years.
4. Continued
rapid rate of growth which is currently the highest in the state (highest SEV
in
5. A threat to
the community is the lack of transportation infrastructure. Roadways are
currently two lane facilities and there are no freeways.
Jack Burton 231/271-4053
1. Mr. Burton is
a 14 year resident of the Township.
2. The area is
developing residentially with a modest amount of commercial development in and
around the Township.
3. The
beautiful environment is the main attraction. If development diminishes that
beauty, development could be discouraged in the future.
4.
Mr. Burton
feels that the area will continue to development slowly with residential and
commercial uses and that it will have a positive impact on the community.
5. A threat to
the community could be the lack of infrastructure. Infrastructure needs to be
adequate to support new development.
John Holcombe 231/271-6700
1. Dr. Holcombe
is a business owner in
2. The trend
has been for steady (not extreme) development pressure, both residential and
commercial. Also noticed is more traffic in the area.
3. The area is
desirable to development due to its natural beauty and nice businesses.
Existing development controls were noted as playing a role in maintaining the
physical attractiveness of the Township. High property values could discourage
future development.
4. Continued development
pressure is likely. Development can be positive if it is guided through
planning, zoning, and environmental regulations that ensure continued viability
of natural amenities.
5. As already witnessed, development brings opportunities for
expanded and improved social amenities such as health services and educational
programs and facilities. A threat to future development would be destruction of
the area’s attractiveness.
Susan Cronander 231/947-9432
1. Susan is a planner for the Grand Traverse Band. The Band is partially located in
2. The trend
noticed is more residential development and diminishing open space lands,
especially land that has a view of the water.
3. These trends
are encouraged because the area is very attractive (e.g., small town character
and beauty). Rising property values
influenced by the influx of affluent is probably deterring development.
4. Development
in the community will probably continue to be residential and spread out in
nature. This will have a negative impact
on the community if not properly managed.
5. Continued development
is both an asset and a threat.
Development needs to be more carefully guided. It is important that the area’s character be
preserved. The Grand Traverse Band is
open to collaboration with surrounding local governments on economic
development and other common issues.
Jim Nugent 231/271-6785
1. Mr. Nugent
is with the Michigan State Agricultural Extension Office which provides
technical assistance to fruit growers in
2. In the past,
residential development took place in the towns, then around the shoreline
(which is approaching build out). More recently (past 20 years), residential
development is occurring outside these areas.
3. Encouraging
growth are retirees moving to the area; desirable location; good schools, job
opportunities in
4. Continued
residential development at a rapid pace is expected in the future. Unless significant changes are made relative to land use (e.g.,
creative land use techniques), residential uses will eat up farmlands.
Negative ramifications, such as loss of agricultural land, strain on the school
system, water quality (surface and groundwater) pollution, and infrastructure
deficiencies, will be realized without proper management.
5. The
Townships rural character will be threatened in the long run by residential
development. It will be difficult for agricultural uses to survive.
Environmental issues will increase.
Gary Hoenshield 231/271-6082
1. Mr. Hoenshield has been a resident for 19 years.
2. The trend
has been in residential development. From an impact standpoint (what is most
visible), condominiums and single-family houses are predominant.
3. The fact
that people like the area is encouraging development. Minimum lot size
requirements could discourage development, however,
there are ways of circumventing the regulations such as through the site condo
process.
4. The
community will continue to develop as it is developing right now. This trend is
positive if you have lived in the Township a long time and negative if you have
not.
5. Traffic
congestion and traffic accidents are threats to future development.
Mike Scott 231/271-4921
1. Mr. Scott is
a nine year resident of the Township and a developer.
2. The trend
has been an increase in residential development which has been primarily large
lot, single-family development.
3. This trend
is encouraged by demand for housing by people who find the area to be a nice
place to live. A discouragement to development is that the Township government,
comprised in many instances of recent relocatees,
seems to be against new development.
4. This type of
growth will continue in the future. He had mixed feelings as to whether this
pattern would be positive or negative. It would be negative if the area were to
be over built.
5. The biggest
threat would be over development, especially of the large lot,
single-family variety (consumes too much land). Opportunities exist to
encourage multi-unit housing and commercial development in the Township.
Bill Crandell 231/271-3643
1. Mr.
Crandell is employed as the High School
principal. He has been a resident of
2. The trend has been a constant expansion of residential housing.
3. The diverse business community and its small town appeal is encouraging development. No deterrents to development are recognized.
4. Mr. Crandell envisions a continuation of residential
development stemming from
5. A threat to
the community is the loss of the Township’s small town character. He is afraid of
Ed Hahnenberg 231/256-9506
1. Mr. Hahnenberg is a resident of the Township for 56 years and a business owner for 18 years.
2. The trend in
land development has been primarily in residential development.
3. That people
want to live in the County is encouraging development. Restrictions as to how
land can be subdivided could be an obstacle to development.
4. The future
holds more residential development and a transition from an agricultural
community to a suburban and tourist-based community. This development trend can
be positive if regulations help preserve the area’s pristine beauty.
5. Membership
on boards and committees is comprised more and more of recent arrivals to the
community. This shift has had the effect of changing longstanding community
values relative to land use, such as the ability to divide and distribute
family-owned land down to children. Land use restrictions are becoming,
perhaps, too stringent. It’s important that long time residents have
representation on boards and committees. Mr. Hahnenberg
also noted frustration over snow mobilers using
private property and law enforcement being unable to police this form of
trespassing.
John Petoskey 231/271-6391
1. Mr.
Petoskey is a lawyer and resident of
2. He
sees land development consuming farmland in the Township. He notes that
3. Mr. Petoskey
views that the Grand Traverse Band of Chippewa Indians in Peshawbestown
has been a significant shaper of development in
4. He sees
older families struggling to sustain their businesses in the Township as the
local economy shifts away from farming.
He explained that farmers historically made profit through exploiting
minority workers. This practice isn’t as
feasible in today’s strong economy. He
feels that the Township’s economy will grow through increasing its residential
tax base and through higher assessed values.
5. Mr. Petoskey
views the tribe asserting land claims on properties in
Martin Korson 231/271-3824
1. Mr. Korson is a lifelong resident and farmer.
2. The trend
happening in the Township is a boom in residential housing.
3. Factors
encouraging development are the Township’s location, scenic views, and
climate. He feels that the price of land
is a discouraging factor to development.
4. He sees the
Township continuing to grow in the future without organization. Would like to see a more
organized development pattern that preserves open space. The only positive aspect associated with
continued expansion is an increased tax base.
Negative impacts relate to deterioration of the natural environment and
increased land values. He feels that
rising housing cost may force long-time local residents out of the Township and
make it difficult for young people to remain.
5. Mr. Korson feels that the cost of land and the prevailing wage
are a threat to the community.
Norm
Christenson 231/271-3818
1. Mr.
Christenson is a cherry grower in
2. He sees an
increase in the number of homes in the Township. Consequently, there has been a reduction in
agricultural acreage. According to Mr.
Christenson, the cherry business has not been very good. Fortunately, growers can raise half sweet and
half sour cherry crops. He notes that
much of the residential development has been along the lakeshore and on view
properties. He sees this trend
continuing into the future.
3. He feels
that the
4. He sees the
Township moving more towards a bedroom community than an agricultural one. He sees the population changing to include
more retirees and those that can “take their jobs with them”. He views this trend as being mostly
positive. Moreover, he is concerned
about the impact of population growth on public services and the increase in
crime more people bring.
5. He feels
that the Township has the opportunity to retain younger residents through
developing an industrial park. Would like growers and farmers to have the ability to sell property
if needed. Further, he sees a
change in the tax structure to allow assessments to be based on income rather
than land values as an opportunity to preserve farmland.
Brian
Price 231/256-9665
1. Mr.
Price is employed by the Leelanau Conservancy, a countywide land trust whose
service area includes
2. The trend
has been that of fragmentation of resource lands (i.e., farmlands and open
space) and continued build out of waterfront and view properties.
3. The area’s
excellent quality of life (e.g., natural beauty, good schools, close to
4. He sees the
community getting a handle on effective planning tools to help deal with
increasing development pressure. Government should look beyond traditional
zoning to preserve farmland and open space and consider implementing security
areas, forest districting, and purchase of development rights. Development
should be directed toward the Village or in new nodes.
5. A threat to
the community is the Grand Traverse Band Casino development. The casino will
bring a lightening bolt of development, therefore, the
tribe should be part of the planning process. Opportunities exist for keeping
farmers producing on their farms. Improved economic conditions for timber,
cherries, and grapes should be an incentive for farmers to participate in
conservation programs such as selling of development rights.
Owen Bahle 231/271-3524
1. Mr.
Bahle is a third generation
2. Growth,
growth, growth. The Township must grow and can’t help but grow but there should
be planned, controlled growth. Growth is necessary for a healthy community.
Growth will take place in medium and high priced homes by retired people. This
is not an industrial growth area.
3. Suttons Bay
Village is a well-balanced community offering good professional services,
superior educational facilities, churches, and a strong business community. It
is nestled in hills and on the water, and is an interesting place to live.
4. Waterfront
lots are limited and residential development will replace farmland. Farms are
having economic difficulty, so it is difficult to justify their existence. They
will be missed as a green belt, which is a negative fact. I see the need for
developing cluster housing and reduced lot size. Recreation should be developed
and emphasized - especially golf courses, walking and bike trails, parks,
beaches, playgrounds, especially soccer fields, etc. Higher density growth makes
public recreational facilities essential.
5. The terrain
of this area lends itself to ideal residential development and is attractive to
retired and family living. The threat is that the present planning is totally
incorrect, especially in addressing utilities and open space. There is an
urgent need for affordable housing now and in the future. Trailer parks should
be addressed - some of this planning may require cooperation between the
townships. This is necessary to accommodate people employed in lower paying
jobs.
Historic Note: The Township and entire County were seriously affected by
the 1930's depression. The industrial boom brought on by World War II did not
impact this area in the 1940's. In fact, the economic conditions in the 1950's,
60's, and 70's were low growth. The rapid growth we are now experiencing has
been relatively short termed. The current rate of growth has been rapid but not
undesirable. The quality of life is better now than it has ever been. Growth is
not all bad!
John Konieczka 231/271-6268
1. Mr. Konieczka is a resident (18 years) and business owner (4.5 years).
2. Residential
development everywhere in the community has been the trend. Loss of farmland
was also mentioned.
3. People are
moving to the Township and demanding new housing because it is a nice place to
live. As a discouragement, he viewed the development approval process as
onerous and without added public benefit for all the difficulty involved. It
took him 18 months to open his business.
4. More
residential growth and loss of farmland are expected in the future. He
indicated that he was neutral as to whether this would be positive or negative.
He also mentioned that there was a need for more production jobs in the area.
5. The threat
is from local opposition (typically from newer residents) to new development.
People should be able to develop their property in accordance with zoning
regulations.
Ben Carroll 231/271-3846
1. Mr. Carroll
is a high school senior and resident of
2. The trends
noticed are more residential and commercial development, larger houses
(especially along M-22 on the way to
3. Demand has
increased because the area is super nice. The Township offers a beautiful,
natural environment. It is not a big city, not polluted, and has a low
incidence of crime. Mr. Carroll did not know of any obstacles to development.
4. In the
future, the Township will continue to grow as it is now. Development will be
both positive, e.g., larger businesses will bring more money into the area; and
negative, e.g., more people, more crime, less space for the natural
environment.
5. The natural
beauty of the Township presents special opportunities for the community. The
major threat is that over population will cause pollution and destruction of
the natural environment.