Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny proposal for teepee 'specialty resort' after neighbor opposition and deed‑restriction issues
Summary
The Lawrence County Board of Commissioners denied a conditional‑use permit for a proposed specialty resort (teepees) on a 26‑acre property after neighbors raised concerns about traffic, precedent and a deed restriction; planning staff discovered the property was listed on Airbnb.
The Lawrence County Board of Commissioners denied a conditional‑use permit application for a proposed specialty resort that would have placed teepee‑style lodging on a 26‑acre property near Horse Road.
Neighbors and two commissioners pressed the issue after planning staff found the site’s guest house had been listed on Airbnb despite a deed restriction the owners had signed when the guest house was built. Joyce DeWald, a near neighbor, told the board: "We are against the application for the campground and are hoping that you deny that today. We feel it's gonna affect the peace and tranquility that we enjoy so much in our neighborhood now, and it will also put an additional strain on our roads." (public comment, March 11)
Applicant Lad (Lad) McCluskey, who described a phased plan to add a small number of teepee sites over three years, said the intent was to provide short‑term lodging similar to other short‑term rentals in the area and to screen guests by ratings; he said, “If you build a house ... and take that house and let it go up to rent, and I live somewhere else, that's perfectly fine.” McCluskey also told the board he had reservations for an upcoming event and that they would not be canceled.
Planning staff recommended continued review to resolve a pair of related issues: (1) the deed restriction on the guest house that prohibits rental was still recorded on the property, and (2) the guest house had active short‑term rental listings found by staff. Commissioners concluded that the property currently did not conform to rules for lodging and that adding the CUP would exacerbate a nonconforming situation.
Commissioner Jennings moved to deny the CUP and directed staff to investigate the apparent rental activity and deed‑restriction compliance; the motion was seconded and carried on a roll call vote. The board also instructed staff to address potential "bed‑and‑breakfast" or short‑term rental compliance and return with findings at a later meeting.
Why it matters: The denial reinforces the county’s reliance on deed restrictions and zoning controls to manage the spread of short‑term rentals and campground‑style uses in rural residential neighborhoods, and it triggers an enforcement review of an existing guest house that staff found advertised online. The decision includes direction to staff to examine the legal status of existing short‑term rental listings and whether the deed restriction was breached.
Meeting context: The CUP hearing drew multiple public speakers in the room; planning staff provided background showing the guest house deed restriction and an email from the applicant’s planner. The applicant described seasonal use (about three months) and a three‑year phased plan to place teepees in forested areas on the property.
Ending: The board denied the CUP application and asked staff to return with information on deed‑restriction compliance and short‑term rental activity before any future application could be considered.
