Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Pinson School Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves two ACS Home Builders rezonings on Pinson School Road amid dispute over duplicate traffic‑study fees
Summary
The Robertson County Commission approved two rezoning requests for property at 3509 Pinson School Road presented by ACS Home Builders, while the applicant raised a complaint about being charged twice for a county traffic-study review and asked for reimbursement.
The Robertson County Commission on March 23 approved two rezoning measures to allow development at 3509 Pinson School Road after a public hearing that included questions about traffic assessments and review fees. The measures—filed by ACS Home Builders on behalf of Donna Saad—would rezone portions of the 6.65‑acre parcel to allow new home lots.
Grama Suggs, who identified herself as the owner of ACS Home Builders, told the commission she bought the property to subdivide and build homes and explained why she requested R-40 zoning for one portion and RP‑80 for another. She said the parcel has about 1,100 feet of road frontage and asked commissioners to "vote in favor for this." Hunter, a county planning staff member, read the resolutions and noted the planning commission recommended approval 8–0 while flagging deficiencies in the traffic assessment that the county's traffic engineer expected to see in more detail.
Suggs also raised a financial complaint about the review process. She said she paid $850 for an initial traffic study, then was billed twice—$1,320 each time—when the county hired a separate reviewer to analyze the same study: "I paid $850 for them to come out and do the traffic study... It was $1,320 to review it. And because I did zoning R‑40 and then zoning RP‑80... they charged me 2 times to review the same traffic study. I feel personally that I should be given at least 1 of those funds back, $1,320," she said. County officials said the county attorney would review the contracting and billing arrangement so similar cases do not recur.
After motions and seconds, the commission approved Resolution 032326020 (AG‑2 to R‑40) and Resolution 032326021 (AG‑2 to RP‑80). The chair announced vote tallies orally in the meeting transcript as "24 2" for the R‑40 item and "21 4, 1 against" for the RP‑80 item. The commission did not record individual roll‑call votes by name in the transcript excerpt provided.
The approvals allow ACS Home Builders to proceed with the proposed lot layouts subject to any conditions imposed by planning or subsequent county processes. The applicant said she would follow up on the county's review to resolve the fee dispute.
