Consultant outlines proposed zoning-code rewrite for Village of Harrison, emphasizing residential restructuring and ADU flexibility

SRF Consulting presented proposed changes to Harrison’s zoning code at a joint meeting of the village board and planning commission on April 21, saying the rewrite aims to modernize language, align zoning with the comprehensive plan and add flexibility for residential and small-scale economic uses.

“My name is Mitch Brous. I am a planner with SRF Consulting Group,” the consultant said, and outlined a multi-phase process now in its third phase to translate a proposed structure into code language. He said state law requires zoning to be consistent with a community’s comprehensive plan and that the project’s goals include protecting agricultural land, focusing growth in urbanized areas and preserving Harrison’s historic character.

SRF recommended consolidating four existing residential districts into three: R1 (low density), R2 (medium density) and R3 (high density). For R1, the firm recommended a 12,000-square-foot minimum lot size, allowing single-family homes and limited accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which corresponds to roughly 3.6 units per acre under current assumptions. R2 would allow a wider mix—single-family dwellings, accessory units, duplexes and townhomes up to three units per building—with proposed minimums for duplex units in the 4,000–8,000-square-feet-per-duplex range. R3 would carry the existing multifamily allowances, with a maximum roughly equivalent to the current 15 units per acre.

SRF used local examples to illustrate the scale of change: the Miragio Apartments and Novella Apartments were cited as existing multifamily properties with densities around eight units per acre, in line with the consultant’s R3 expectations. The consultant also provided sample block-scale calculations and two illustrative site examples adjacent to Woodland and Sunrise elementary schools to show how duplexes and small clusters of single-family homes would read at the neighborhood level.

Commissioners asked whether the proposal had reduced lot-size minimums too much and whether developers would choose smaller lots for higher returns. SRF responded that a combination of lot-coverage limits, development standards and local review would moderate outcomes. The consultant also pointed to infrastructure constraints: sewer and water service areas will limit where higher-density zoning can be implemented.

Panelists discussed ADUs as a key tool for adding housing supply. SRF said Harrison’s existing code limits—an ADU size cap cited in the meeting as 600 square feet and age/occupancy restrictions—could be relaxed to increase ADU availability, and invited board and commission input on size and permitting. Commissioners also raised senior-housing options; SRF recommended planned-development tools to design site-specific standards if a larger or specialized senior project were proposed.

SRF recommended a tiered permitting approach for home-based businesses so lower-impact operations could use a simplified approval while more-intensive uses (for example, equipment storage or multiple employees) would face higher review. The consultant also proposed adding defined pathways for agritourism-type activities in rural areas.

The presentation included high-level land-use figures from the comprehensive-plan map: SRF reported about 57.5% of the village identified as agricultural in the future land-use plan, roughly 17% as low-density residential, about 1.8% medium density and just under 1% high density, leaving limited undeveloped parcels suitable for higher-density change.

SRF and staff closed by stressing the draft nature of the proposals and next steps: map the proposed zones, refine code language and return for additional review before any adoption vote.

What happens next: SRF and village staff will continue drafting code language and mapping recommended zones; the planning commission and board will review refinements in future meetings before any ordinance is formally introduced.