CLARKESVILLE — The Habersham County Commission voted unanimously Monday night to uphold the recommendation of staff and the planning commission to deny allowing construction of overnight rental property in an established neighborhood.
Developer Danny Otter appeared before the county commission to speak in favor of them granting a conditional use that would allow him to construct a two-bedroom cottage and a one-bedroom treehouse, along with a hobby greenhouse, at 645 Sherwood Drive, Clarkesville, in a low intensity district.
Because the proposed site is located along the Soque River, Otter said he wanted to provide nightly rental opportunities for 100 nights per year on the 2.42-acre property located across from the Clarkesville Reservoir.
“Mr. Otter originally came before the planning commission with a proposal for seven treehouses/cabins on the property and reduced the request to two after meeting with the neighborhood,” the executive summary presented to the county commission Monday night states.
As they did at the planning commission meeting, several neighborhood residents, or their immediate family members, raised concerns with the proposed development being constructed in that location.
Otter told the county commission the property has been vacant for 32 years, since a home on the property burned.
In his 35 years as a developer, Otter said he has always tried to make a property better than it was when he began. He added he has owned three homes in the neighborhood in question, as well as two pieces of property there.
Otter emphasized his best friend lives in the neighborhood and that’s another reason he would not construct anything that would have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Regarding concerns of placing overnight rental units along the Soque River in the neighborhood, Otter said he found 193 Airbnb locations in the Clarkesville area.
Rob Hand spoke in favor of Otter’s request, pointing out the successful developments and innovative projects Otter has brought to the area.
A couple of the residents who spoke publicly against Otter’s request for the conditional use said they are not opposed to the concept, but they just don’t want to see it in that particular location because of traffic, noise, potential crime, and the incompatible nature of the use in that neighborhood.
“I will just add one comment from my part,” Commission Chairman Victor Anderson said during the meeting. “I’ve known Mr. Otter and Mr. Hand for years in the business and I’ve worked with them for years. I have no doubt that they have good intention for the community.”
Anderson said he shared the feelings of the residents, adding he likes the idea but maybe not in its proposed location.
“I like the concept and I like the way you’ve got it laid out,” Anderson told Otter. “Where the planning commission is tasked with enforcing the letter of the code, when things come to this board it becomes a question of more of a subjective matter. We do have to listen and are tasked with listening to our constituents and fellow residents of the county.”
Commissioner Stacy Hall made the motion to deny the conditional use request from Otter. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Andrea Harper, with all voting in favor.
