Residents Weigh in on Changes to Development Rules in Habersham
- Brian Wellmeier
- Apr 14
- 4 min read
By: Brian Wellmeier
New rules for countywide development were considered by the Habersham community after more than 100 residents packed Ruby C. Fulbright Aquatic Center on Monday, April 13.
During Monday's town hall, county officials said revisions had already been made to the current draft of the Unified Development Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Director Mike Beecham said the section addressing derelict vehicles had been removed from the proposal. He added that officials were reevaluating how the ordinance addresses data centers, particularly their demand on power and water resources, use of public utilities and overall impact on the community.
Beecham said the county is limited in how it can regulate such facilities.
Under current law, he said, data centers cannot be outright prohibited and may only be considered through the special use permit process.
“We’re trying to walk a fine line between private property rights and preserving the rural nature of the county,” Beecham said.
Key changes made by the proposal, if approved, include:
Minimum Home Size: New subdivisions would require homes to have at least 1,500 square feet of heated living space.
Zoning Changes: Residential uses would be removed from general industrial districts to avoid conflicts between housing and industry.
Rural Design Standards: Curb and gutter requirements would be eliminated in rural, agricultural and conservation areas unless developers use cluster-style layouts with smaller lots.
Traffic Studies: Only developments expected to generate more than 50 peak-hour trips per day – typically around 50 homes – would be required to conduct traffic studies. Officials say this could reduce costs for smaller projects.
Habersham County Commission Chairman Bruce Harkness told WCHM Radio on Tuesday, April 14, that he was encouraged by the strong turnout and public engagement.
“The public gave us a lot of good points that we need to discuss and have more meetings on,” Harkness said. “This is going to change the landscape of our county and our community for years to come.”
As in a commission meeting in March, many residents focused their comments on proposed minimum lot sizes, acreage requirements and the potential effects on housing affordability.
Patricia Bower urged commissioners to slow the process and provide more clarity before taking action. “I think we need to have more public input and guidance on what this means and the difference between this (UDO) and the existing one before (commissioners) vote on it,” Bower said.
Teresa Lewallen voiced concern about rapid growth and its strain on local resources, particularly water.
“My love for this county is just hard to express because I was born and raised here, and I just hate to see all this growth happening,” Lewallen said. “I really don’t like to see people who come in from the cities without our love for the county…my concern is the water supply. The more people we bring into this county that aren’t living here, the more it’s going to take away from the people already living here.”
Commissioner Kelly Woodall said after the meeting that the discussion included both concerns and constructive feedback, adding that portions of the proposal could still be refined. He said the ordinance is designed to shape how development occurs without placing unnecessary burdens on individual property owners.
“It was a good discussion,” Woodall said. “Those are the kind of things, as a county, that help us make hard decisions and difficult moves together. We’re all trying to do the same thing – for the betterment of the community. I thought the whole town hall was very positive.”
During the town hall, Woodall said the broader objective to the proposed changes is to channel higher-density growth into existing municipalities and commercial corridors while preserving the county’s rural character through larger lot requirements in outlying areas.
“It’s not perfect," he said. "But we’re still working on it.”
As officials spoke between segments of public input Monday, Commissioner Dustin Mealor said the proposal remains a work in progress.
"This isn’t set in stone," he said.
Mealor added that protecting the county’s long-term quality of life remains central to the effort.
“I’d like to see my kids want to live here when they grow up," Mealor said at the town hall Monday.
On Tuesday, Harkness also addressed questions about how the changes could affect inherited land and property classifications, saying commissioners are willing to review individual cases.
“Even if these rules change classifications of peoples’ property, they need to find out now what their classification is going to be,” Harkness said. “If they disagree with it, we need to work on it now. If they need to be put in a different classification, that’s going to make it easier on it in the future…commissioners do deserve the right to review those cases on an individual basis.”
County officials are expected to continue reviewing feedback and refining the proposal. A formal vote on the ordinance is expected in June.
Comments