Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends denial of 211-home rezoning near Highway 9 and Dawson Forest Road
Summary
The Dawson County Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend denial of a rezoning and future land use map amendment that would allow a 211‑home subdivision on about 123.48 acres at the southwest corner of State Route 9 and Dawson Forest Road, citing infrastructure and traffic concerns. The matter will go to the Board of Commissioners on Aug. 21.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Dawson County Planning Commission on July 15 recommended denial of a rezoning application that would allow a 211‑home subdivision at the southwest corner of State Route 9 and Dawson Forest Road in Dawsonville.
Jim King, representing Coleman Family Investments LLC and Bagley Land and Cattle Company LLC, asked the commission to rezone roughly 123.48 acres from RSR and RA to RS‑2 and to amend the future land use map for parcel 088120 from the rural‑living character area to suburban living. King said the proposal would result in 211 detached single‑family homes at about 2 units per net acre and that the project conforms to historical land‑use designations for the intersection node.
The commission’s denial recommendation centered on infrastructure and traffic safety. Commissioners expressed concern that local roads and school access near Riverview Elementary are not prepared for additional development. A motion to recommend denial carried 4‑0; the Board of Commissioners will hear the rezoning Aug. 21.
Why it matters: The proposed subdivision sits at a long‑planned growth node, and the county’s comprehensive plan, school siting and capital improvements assume higher densities in the area. Opponents warned the immediate road network and school access are already strained and told the commission to prioritize infrastructure before allowing more housing.
Details of the proposal and discussion Jim King summarized the site’s planning history, saying the area around Highway 9 and Dawson Forest Road has been treated as a growth node in multiple past comprehensive plans and that the proposed RS‑2 zoning is consistent with those earlier designations. “This development conforms with the master plan,” King said, adding that the plan calls for substantial open space and that the proposed lot widths would be larger than nearby neighborhoods.
Residents who spoke in opposition emphasized traffic, safety and school capacity. Tiffany Georgia, who lives on Dawson Manor Drive, said the Highway 9/Dawson Forest intersection already struggles with existing traffic and emergency vehicle access: “When you’ve left Riverview Elementary and sat backed up past the fire station on Dawson Forest and watched an emergency vehicle … drive up on the curb to get through the intersections. That’s not safe for anyone.” She also said Riverview Elementary lacks school‑zone signage and has a single entrance and exit.
Shannon Stanford, a nearby resident who said she joined the county’s long‑range planning committee, told commissioners the proposed density, lot sizes and build quality “are not aligned with the vision most of us have for this character area.” Rick Marsh, another resident, questioned school capacity and local hospital access, saying, “Where are all these kids gonna go to school at? Who’s gonna pay for all that?”
Commission deliberations and motion Commissioners discussed the 2023 update to the future land use map and whether the most recent plan should control the decision. Planning staff and the applicant noted portions of the Bagley property were designated for higher intensity uses for many years, and King said a portion of the property was split into different character areas during the 2023 update.
Despite the planning arguments, one commissioner said the primary concern was infrastructure readiness and moved to recommend denial “based upon infrastructure development”; another commissioner seconded the motion. The motion to recommend denial passed 4‑0.
Formal action The Planning Commission’s action was a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners; the commission does not make the final decision on rezoning. The application will be on the Board of Commissioners agenda for Aug. 21.
Quoted sources “‘This development conforms with the master plan,’” — Jim King, applicant representative. “‘That’s not safe for anyone. We can staff our EMS, police, and fire departments, but if they struggle to transport us or even get to us, we have failed,’” — Tiffany Georgia, Dawson County resident and speaker in opposition. “‘The density, the lot sizes, and the quality of build are still not aligned with the vision most of us have for this character area,’” — Shannon Stanford, Dawson County resident and member of the long‑range planning committee. “‘Where are all these kids gonna go to school at? Who’s gonna pay for all that?’” — Rick Marsh, Dawson County resident.
Ending The Planning Commission’s recommendation does not end the process. The Board of Commissioners will consider the rezoning application and the Planning Commission’s 4‑0 recommendation to deny at its Aug. 21 meeting, where members of the public may testify again.

