Commissioners press developer to fund intersection upgrades as concerns grow over city‑approved subdivision access
May 28, 2026 | Carroll County, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Community Development Director Ben Skipper presented a development agreement under consideration with Tamarak Land for a subdivision whose driveway will connect to Strippling Chapel Road and create additional turning movements at the US 27 intersection.
Skipper said developers will install a left‑turn lane for northbound traffic on US 27 and a new through lane across US 27; O’Reilly’s will pay for a right‑turn lane and turning lane for southbound movements. "This will be no cost to the taxpayers of Carroll County," Skipper said, adding that the two developers will fund the listed improvements while public works staff would coordinate the timing and inspections.
Commissioners corrected an earlier unit count: the project was described earlier as 300 units during initial discussion, and the board confirmed the current plan shows 246 units. Commissioners and staff raised safety and congestion concerns for the two‑lane county road, especially during school traffic, and described firsthand delays at the intersection. One commissioner described frequently waiting through multiple light cycles while driving a school bus.
Several commissioners expressed frustration that the county had not been looped in earlier in the development process because the subdivision lies within the city of Carolton but accesses a county road. "If a city is going to build a subdivision and it comes out on a county road, they need to come and talk to us," a commissioner said. Staff confirmed a stop‑work order had been placed when county right‑of‑way work was observed without a county permit.
The board directed staff to revise the draft agreement to clarify whether third‑party contractors will perform the paving and to ensure the county’s standards and inspection oversight are specified. Commissioners also asked staff to draft an amendment to the county’s development regulations to require explicit county sign‑offs or a signature block when another jurisdiction approves projects that access county roads. Skipper and staff agreed to return with revisions ahead of the Tuesday meeting; the item will be discussed again at the regular meeting.
The work session did not include a formal vote on the development agreement.
Skipper said developers will install a left‑turn lane for northbound traffic on US 27 and a new through lane across US 27; O’Reilly’s will pay for a right‑turn lane and turning lane for southbound movements. "This will be no cost to the taxpayers of Carroll County," Skipper said, adding that the two developers will fund the listed improvements while public works staff would coordinate the timing and inspections.
Commissioners corrected an earlier unit count: the project was described earlier as 300 units during initial discussion, and the board confirmed the current plan shows 246 units. Commissioners and staff raised safety and congestion concerns for the two‑lane county road, especially during school traffic, and described firsthand delays at the intersection. One commissioner described frequently waiting through multiple light cycles while driving a school bus.
Several commissioners expressed frustration that the county had not been looped in earlier in the development process because the subdivision lies within the city of Carolton but accesses a county road. "If a city is going to build a subdivision and it comes out on a county road, they need to come and talk to us," a commissioner said. Staff confirmed a stop‑work order had been placed when county right‑of‑way work was observed without a county permit.
The board directed staff to revise the draft agreement to clarify whether third‑party contractors will perform the paving and to ensure the county’s standards and inspection oversight are specified. Commissioners also asked staff to draft an amendment to the county’s development regulations to require explicit county sign‑offs or a signature block when another jurisdiction approves projects that access county roads. Skipper and staff agreed to return with revisions ahead of the Tuesday meeting; the item will be discussed again at the regular meeting.
The work session did not include a formal vote on the development agreement.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
