Author: H Ermes

  • 2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda · Work Session Meeting · Agenda

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda · Work Session Meeting · Agenda

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 f277f8f7 · pages 3 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL Mayor At–Large Work Session Meeting Agenda March 31, 2026 6:00 PM Jayden L. Williams Mayor Pro Tem Elton Alexander Council District 5 Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt Council District 1 Councilmember Antwan Cloud Council District 2 Councilmember Kyle D. Berry, Sr. Council District 3 Councilmember Yolanda Barber Council District 4 CITY MANAGER Stockbridge City Hall Shawn Edmondson 4640 N. Henry Blvd. INTERIM CITY CLERK Stockbridge, GA 30281 Cassandra Lester CITY TREASURER Frank Milazi CITY ATTORNEY Quinton G. Washington Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 Translation and Interpretation Services are available with (7) days prior notice. Please contact the City’s Human Resource Manager at 770-389-7908 for assistance. AGENDA WORK SESSION MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1 Approval of the City Council Special Called Meeting Minutes February 12, 2026 2 Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes March 09, 2026 PUBLIC COMMENTS - All persons wishing to speak for public comment must sign in with the City Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. You must sign your name, address, and phone number. You will be able to address the Mayor and Council for three (3) minutes. Speakers must respect all members of the elected body, officials, and staff. Defamation, unruliness and/or swearing will not be tolerated while meetings are in session. PRESENTATION 3 Henry County Schools City of Stockbridge Update Presentation - Presented by: Stefon Plummer CONSENT AGENDA 4 Confirmation of the Chief of Police with an official start date of April 13, 2026 OLD BUSINESS 5 STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET. (Council District 4) (Second Reading) Consideration of a resolution to change the names of both North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. This action is intended to honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. while Page | 3 aligning the corridor with a name that reflects the community's historical and cultural values. Applicant: City of Stockbridge. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson NEW BUSINESS 6 Council consideration to approve the increase in the City's paid Basic Life Insurance benefit from $10,000 to $50,000, effective April 1, 2026. - Presented by: Dwayne Pollock 7 Council consideration to approve Dianna Hunt & Associates, Inc. to provide acquisition services for approximately 43 parcels in connection with the Tye Street Muti-Use Path Project right-of-way acquisitions. First phase of acquisition service is estimated at $40,000.00. Funding source from TSPLOST. 33542200-541404. - Presented by: Decius Aaron 8 Council consideration to approve piggybacking of Macon-Bibb County RFP No. 24-022-LH Traffic Signal Repairs and Maintenance Services, issued April 5, 2024, with Riverside Traffic Solutions, LLC. Funding for this contract is available in the FY2026 operating budget under Account No. 100-42200-522224. - Presented by: Decius Aaron 9 Council consideration to approve the purchase of two vehicles for departmental use at a cost not to exceed $94,910. Funding for this purchase is available in the FY 2026 budget, General Ledger No. 100-74100-5422. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson MAYOR'S COMMENTS (Jayden L. Williams) EXECUTIVE SESSION (Exemptions to the Georgia Open Meetings Acts) ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING MEETINGS & EVENTS Council meetings will be held in the City Council Chamber, while some Board and Committee meetings will take place via Zoom. Meeting dates and times may change, so please check the city's website at www.stockbridgega.org or contact City Hall at 770-389-7900 for updates. The City of Stockbridge complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and does not discriminate based on disability. Individuals requiring auxiliary services for meeting participation should contact City Hall at 770-389-7900 in advance. ADJOURNMENT March 31, 2026 6:00 PM 4640 N. Henry Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
  • 2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda Packet · Work Session Meeting · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda Packet · Work Session Meeting · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Agenda Packet · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 3f27e3db · pages 152 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL Mayor At–Large Work Session Meeting Agenda March 31, 2026 6:00 PM Jayden L. Williams Mayor Pro Tem Elton Alexander Council District 5 Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt Council District 1 Councilmember Antwan Cloud Council District 2 Councilmember Kyle D. Berry, Sr. Council District 3 Councilmember Yolanda Barber Council District 4 CITY MANAGER Stockbridge City Hall Shawn Edmondson 4640 N. Henry Blvd. INTERIM CITY CLERK Stockbridge, GA 30281 Cassandra Lester CITY TREASURER Frank Milazi CITY ATTORNEY Quinton G. Washington Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 Translation and Interpretation Services are available with (7) days prior notice. Please contact the City’s Human Resource Manager at 770-389-7908 for assistance. AGENDA WORK SESSION MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1 Approval of the City Council Special Called Meeting Minutes February 12, 2026 2 Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes March 09, 2026 PUBLIC COMMENTS - All persons wishing to speak for public comment must sign in with the City Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. You must sign your name, address, and phone number. You will be able to address the Mayor and Council for three (3) minutes. Speakers must respect all members of the elected body, officials, and staff. Defamation, unruliness and/or swearing will not be tolerated while meetings are in session. PRESENTATION 3 Henry County Schools City of Stockbridge Update Presentation - Presented by: Stefon Plummer CONSENT AGENDA 4 Confirmation of the Chief of Police with an official start date of April 13, 2026 OLD BUSINESS 5 STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET. (Council District 4) (Second Reading) Consideration of a resolution to change the names of both North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. This action is intended to honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. while Page | 3 aligning the corridor with a name that reflects the community's historical and cultural values. Applicant: City of Stockbridge. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson NEW BUSINESS 6 Council consideration to approve the increase in the City's paid Basic Life Insurance benefit from $10,000 to $50,000, effective April 1, 2026. - Presented by: Dwayne Pollock 7 Council consideration to approve Dianna Hunt & Associates, Inc. to provide acquisition services for approximately 43 parcels in connection with the Tye Street Muti-Use Path Project right-of-way acquisitions. First phase of acquisition service is estimated at $40,000.00. Funding source from TSPLOST. 33542200-541404. - Presented by: Decius Aaron 8 Council consideration to approve piggybacking of Macon-Bibb County RFP No. 24-022-LH Traffic Signal Repairs and Maintenance Services, issued April 5, 2024, with Riverside Traffic Solutions, LLC. Funding for this contract is available in the FY2026 operating budget under Account No. 100-42200-522224. - Presented by: Decius Aaron 9 Council consideration to approve the purchase of two vehicles for departmental use at a cost not to exceed $94,910. Funding for this purchase is available in the FY 2026 budget, General Ledger No. 100-74100-5422. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson MAYOR'S COMMENTS (Jayden L. Williams) EXECUTIVE SESSION (Exemptions to the Georgia Open Meetings Acts) ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING MEETINGS & EVENTS Council meetings will be held in the City Council Chamber, while some Board and Committee meetings will take place via Zoom. Meeting dates and times may change, so please check the city's website at www.stockbridgega.org or contact City Hall at 770-389-7900 for updates. The City of Stockbridge complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and does not discriminate based on disability. Individuals requiring auxiliary services for meeting participation should contact City Hall at 770-389-7900 in advance. ADJOURNMENT March 31, 2026 6:00 PM 4640 N. Henry Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL CALLED MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2026 6:00 P.M. Mayor & City Council Mayor Jayden L. Willams At-Large Mayor Pro Tem Elton Alexander – Council District 5 Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt – Council District 1 Councilmember Antwan Cloud – Council District 2 Councilmember Kyle D. Berry, Sr. – Council District 3 Councilmember Yolanda Barber – Council District 4 Administration Shawn Edmondson – City Manager Frank Milazi – City Treasurer Cassandra Lester – Interim City Clerk Quinton Washington – City Attorney Megan McCullough – Associate Attorney Mission: To provide visionary leadership and superior municipal services that enhance the quality of life for citizens while creating a welcoming business atmosphere focused on sustainability and expansion of tourism and cultural events. Mayor Jayden L. Williams called the Special Called Meeting to order at 6:03 PM. The Mayor led the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Interim City Clerk Cassandra Lester conducted the roll call. Councilmember Kyle Berry was not present. With all other members present, a quorum was established. Motion to adopt the agenda made by Councilmember Cloud Seconded by: Councilmember Gantt Vote: Approved unanimously 4-0. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Exemptions to the Georgia Open Meetings Act O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1) Mayor Williams requested a motion to go into executive session for real estate, litigation, cybersecurity, and personnel matters. Councilmember Barber objected stated that the matter before them was a contract, which did not qualify for executive session under Georgia law. She noted that executive sessions are limited to personnel, litigation, real estate, or cybersecurity matters, and that this contract should be discussed in the open meeting. Mayor Williams inquired whether the city attorney was present. 1|Page City Manager Shawn Edmondson responded that their legal counsel had previously advised that since the matter dealt with personnel, initial discussions could occur in executive session, but a formal vote would need to take place in the public meeting. Councilmember Barber reiterated her concern about violating the Open Meetings Act. Stating the issue before the city council was a professional services agreement, and the Council had already approved the personnel matter when they voted to select the individual at the prior city council meeting. She emphasized again that what was before them was a professional services agreement that should be discussed in the open meeting, though she would defer to the consensus of the Council. Councilmember Gantt stated that the city council would be discussing a legal contract agreement that had not been finalized. She noted that as a legal matter, and any legal matters can be discussed behind closed doors, consistent with the Council's practice since at least 2014. She stated that once they finalized the legal agreement, they would return for the public vote. Motion to go into executive session for real estate, cyber security, personnel, and litigation made by Councilmember Gantt; Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. Vote: Approved 3-1 (Barber opposed) Councilmember Barber stated for the record that she opposed because "this is a contract." The Council adjourned for executive session. Motion to end executive session and return to the regular scheduled meeting made by Councilmember Gantt; Seconded by Councilmember Cloud: Vote: Approved unanimously 4-0. Mayor Williams announced that there were two items to bring back to the public from executive session. The first item was presented with a motion to approve the contractual agreement with Sandra Poag in the amount of $140,000.00 (one hundred forty thousand dollars) as the General Manager for the Vystar Amphitheater made by Councilmember Gantt; Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. Discussion: Councilmember Barber stated there were several questions she had asked via email and in executive session that should have been asked in the public meeting. Citing that all questions do not relate to the contract per se but wanted them for public knowledge. She requested the following be stated on the record: • The Council has not yet adopted or approved a rental policy for the amphitheater. • She had asked about assistance with finalizing the contract. • She requested a force majeure clause be added to all contracts. • She inquired about limited liability insurance for vendors and everyone else. 2|Page • She noted the amphitheater has historically not been in use from October to March and asked for creative ideas to generate revenue during that period. (The following questions were mentioned at the meeting and emailed to the clerk’s office during this meeting for the record) • Why was this contract advertised as a Job Announcement as opposed to a solicitation (RFQ)? • Why is limited liability insurance not required? Mayor Williams called for the vote as previously stated by Councilmember Gantt and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander for all those in favor of the contractual agreement with Sandra Poag in the amount of $140,000.00 (one hundred forty thousand dollars) as the General Manager for the Vystar Amphitheater. Vote: Approved 3-1 (Barber opposed) Councilmember Barber stated her opposition was because her questions had not been answered and there were still changes that needed to be made to the contract. The second item from Executive Session was presented with a motion to approve the Seay Firm LLC for entertainment legal services that was made by Councilmember Gantt Seconded by: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. Vote: Approved 3-1 (Barber opposed) Councilmember Barber stated she opposed because the information was just provided to her in executive session, and she hadn't had an opportunity to review any information prior to the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn made by Councilmember Gantt: Seconded by Councilmember Cloud: Motion approved unanimously 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 PM. Respectfully submitted by: ______________________________ ______________________________ Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk Jayden L. Williams, Mayor 3|Page CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES MONDAY MARCH 9, 2026 6:00 P.M. Mayor & City Council Mayor Jayden L. Willams At-Large Mayor Pro Tem Elton Alexander – Council District 5 Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt – Council District 1 Councilmember Antwan Cloud – Council District 2 Councilmember Kyle D. Berry, Sr. – Council District 3 Councilmember Yolanda Barber – Council District 4 Administration Shawn Edmondson – City Manager Frank Milazi – City Treasurer Cassandra Lester – Interim City Clerk Quinton Washington – City Attorney Megan McCullough – Associate Attorney Mission: To provide visionary leadership and superior municipal services that enhance the quality of life for citizens while creating a welcoming business atmosphere focused on sustainability and expansion of tourism and cultural events. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jayden L. Williams at 6:00 PM. Councilmember Kyle Berry led the invocation. Mayor Williams led the Pledge of Allegiance. Interim City Clerk Cassandra Lester proceeded with roll call. A quorum was established. Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt arrived at 6:03 p.m. Mayor Williams requested two amendments to the agenda: removing item number 4 (confirmation of the police chief) and adding to the consent agenda that the city is now a city of civility as discussed during the council retreat. Motion: Councilmember Cloud moved to amend the agenda as requested. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 4-0. Councilmember Barber then requested adding an item for the confirmation of the human resources director to the consent agenda, noting that the position wasn't included on the original agenda. 1|Page City Attorney Megan McCulloch clarified that since it was already discussed and approved by council, it could simply be an announcement, but it could be added to the agenda. Motion: Councilmember Barber moved to add the confirmation of the new HR director to the consent agenda. Councilmember Gantt seconded. The motion passed 5-0. With those amendments, Mayor Williams called for adoption of the agenda. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to adopt the agenda as amended. Councilmember Gantt seconded. The motion passed 5-0. Adoption of the February 24th 2026 Work Session Meeting Minutes Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to approve the February 24, 2026 work session meeting minutes. Councilmember Gantt seconded. The motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS Six citizens signed up for public comments. Below is a summary of their comments: Judy Neal (174 East Club Drive) spoke against the Lee Street name change, sharing her personal history with the area and her sons' attendance at Stockbridge schools. She emphasized the happy memories associated with Lee Street and supported the business owners who had requested the council vote against the name change. She suggested the council respect constituents' concerns and vote no. Marvin Gross (115 North Lee Street) opposed any name change to his street, regardless of what new name might be chosen. He noted his family had lived there for over 80 years, his brick house was built in the early 1960s, and changing the name would cost both the city and residents money for new signs, driver's license changes, and potential address number changes. He questioned why the change was necessary and stated he didn't understand the reason behind it. Coren Randazzo (111 Bryant Street) argued that renaming Lee Street based on dishonesty about its origins undermines Dr. King's legacy. He contended that the street wasn't named after Robert E. Lee but rather a local Lee family, and that creating false narratives devalues both historical truth and Dr. King's memory. He referenced studies showing that MLK streets across America often become associated with declining neighborhoods rather than thriving communities, suggesting symbolic renaming without substance fails to honor what Dr. King stood for. Brandon Dubs (118 Lake Terrace) spoke on behalf of his family's business, Affairs by Pinehurst Catering, which has operated on South Lee Street for over 30 years. He emphasized that while he supports Stockbridge's growth, the name change would create practical difficulties for their business, requiring reprinting materials, updating advertisements, and ensuring GPS systems direct out-of-town wedding guests correctly. He asked the council to reconsider and vote no on the change. 2|Page Mary Broun (115 North Lee Street) became emotional while speaking about Lee Street's historical significance to the community and her personal connection to Stockbridge High School. She suggested that instead of changing the street name, the council consider installing beautiful bronze plaques at the entryways to honor Dr. King, which would be less financially burdensome for residents and businesses while still providing appropriate recognition. She asked the council to vote no on the name change. Chuck Dubs (108 South Lee Street) provided historical context about former Stockbridge mayor R.E. Lee and his wife Mildred, a longtime elementary school teacher. He read from official city council meeting minutes indicating Lee served as mayor for over two decades and was instrumental in bringing electricity, paved roads, and water systems to Stockbridge. He argued that renaming Lee Street would erase the historical value and honor bestowed upon the Lee family and their descendants and respectfully asked the council not to proceed with the name change. CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION OF THE ADOPT-A-ROAD SIGN AND PROCLAMATION FOR THE ZETA MU NU CHAPTER OF OMEGA PSI PHI FRATERNITY, INC. Mayor Williams presented a proclamation recognizing the Zeta Mu Nu Chapter of Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Incorporated for their participation in the City's Adopt-A-Road Program. The proclamation commended the fraternity for their community service and civic engagement in helping to keep roadways clean and enhancing quality of life in the community. Randall Slaughter, representing the Henry County chapter with 106 brothers, expressed honor at being able to help keep the community beautiful. He noted that the fraternity also provides scholarships to high school seniors in the Henry County area and engages in various community activities, stating it was a delight to be a community partner. Mayor Williams expressed his look forward to the first invitation to their road cleanup activities. CONSENT AGENDA Confirmation of the Economic Development Director Mr. William Smith Confirmation of the Chief of Police (removed from agenda) Confirmation of HR Director Mr. Dwayne Pollock (added during agenda amendments) City of Civility Designation (added during agenda amendments) Motion: Councilmember Gantt moved to approve the consent agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 5-0. OLD BUSINESS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE NORFOLK SOUTHERN LEASE AGREEMENT City Attorney Megan McCulloch explained that as discussed at the planning retreat, the Norfolk Southern lease agreement for the parking lot was currently not in the city's best interest in her opinion. She indicated that staff would like to work on fixing the 3|Page agreement before council approval and noted that representatives from the city would be meeting with elected officials to help facilitate improvements to the agreement. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to table the Norfolk Southern Lease Agreement. Councilmember Gantt seconded. The motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (C.I.E.) FOR 2026 Community Development Director Ryan Anderson presented the Capital Improvement Element, explaining its purpose as guiding infrastructure planning and ensuring compliance with state laws. He detailed that the CIE enables strategic budgeting, maintains eligibility for state programs and grants, and coordinates planning across services like parks, safety, and utilities. Anderson explained that Georgia law requires local governments to adopt capital improvement elements for impact fee compliance and planning, with the Georgia Department of Community Affairs setting compliance standards. He noted that Stockbridge's current CIE was based on a 1993 joint document with Henry County and other jurisdictions, but since other jurisdictions had adopted their own CIEs and Henry County amended theirs to be standalone, Stockbridge needed its own CIE. The presentation outlined that Stockbridge's population is projected to increase 53.9 percent by 2050, driving demand for infrastructure improvements. The CIE would support the 2023 annexation impact, ensure development pays its fair share through impact fees, and fund projects like Rock Quarry Road improvements, expanded police facilities, and 33.5 new miles of trail system. Public Comments in Favor: Anthony Ford (47 Lily Glenn Lane) supported the CIE adoption, emphasizing Georgia's position as a top 10 growth state and Henry County as one of the fastest-growing counties in the country. He stressed the importance of properly preparing for inevitable growth and population increases. Councilmember Barber asked Anderson to highlight specific roadway projects affected by the CIE. Anderson mentioned improvements planned for Walt Stevens Road, Jodeco Road, Flippen Road, Highway 138, East Atlanta Road, and North Henry Boulevard, explaining that the CIE would allow the city to collect impact fees from developers to support these initiatives. Motion: Councilmember Barber moved to approve the capital improvement element for 2026. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 5-0. STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET Community Development Director Ryan Anderson presented the agenda item proposing the renaming of North and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King Jr. Way. He stated that the purpose of the change was to honor Dr. King’s legacy and provide a more familiar and unifying name for the high-visibility corridor near City Hall and the amphitheater. Anderson provided background research on Lee Street, noting that the earliest reference identified by staff appeared in City Council meeting minutes from 1949. He 4|Page explained that while some information suggests the street may have been named after General Robert E. Lee, staff research also indicated the possibility that it was named after former Stockbridge Mayor R.E. Lee. As part of the presentation, Anderson displayed a memorial resolution from the February 19, 1952 City Council meeting minutes commemorating former Mayor R.E. Lee following his passing. The resolution outlined his significant contributions to the city, including the introduction of electricity, paved roads, and water systems during his tenure from 1927 to 1952. During the presentation, questions arose regarding the validity of the information provided. Councilmember Gantt reviewed the materials and stated that she could not find specific evidence confirming that Lee Street was named after the former mayor. She emphasized that the memorial resolution did not explicitly reference the street being named in his honor. Veronica Green, Chief Planner for the Community Development Department, clarified that there is no definitive evidence establishing that Lee Street was named for R.E. Lee. She explained, “That is the oral history of the City of Stockbridge.” When asked about the source of this oral history, Green stated that references were found on several websites but could not be included in the presentation due to lack of verifiable citation. She added, “We have to present what we can prove,” referencing the February 19, 1952 City Council minutes as the closest documented connection. Mayor Williams asked for clarification, stating, “So you’re basically saying that Lee Street is not named after anybody?” Green responded that the information presented represents the closest historical reference and association available. Councilmember Berry asked when Lee Street first appeared in postal or official records, and Green reiterated that the first confirmed reference in City meeting minutes was in 1949. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander cautioned that, given the sensitivity of the issue, it is important to rely on verified facts. He stated, “In situations like this, emotions are high. We need to have facts. We cannot have definitive statements without supporting evidence.” He also referenced prior efforts by a former City Clerk to research Confederate-related names within the city. Councilmember Barber, who represents the district containing Lee Street, clarified that the initiative to rename the street did not originate from her but from Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. She stated that the issue was not a priority concern within her district and urged compassion for residents with longstanding ties to the area. Councilmember Barber expressed opposition to the proposed name change and called for a broader, more comprehensive discussion regarding downtown redevelopment. Councilmember Gantt stated that her support for renaming the street was not solely based on any perceived Confederate association, but rather a desire to honor Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by naming a prominent street near the STEM school in his recognition. Councilmember Cloud asked whether the referenced mayor passed away after the earliest documented mention of Lee Street and whether all possible research avenues 5|Page had been exhausted. Anderson responded that significant public interest prompted staff to investigate the origin of the street name. He stated that staff were unable to find evidence confirming that the street was named after General Robert E. Lee and included all available findings in the presentation for transparency. He added that staff conducted thorough research to the best of their ability and presented the information to Council accordingly. Councilmember Cloud confirmed that all reasonable research efforts had been exhausted, and Anderson affirmed. Mayor Williams inquired whether Lee Street may have had a different name prior to its first documented appearance in 1949. Staff indicated that no evidence had been found to suggest a prior name. Councilmember Berry emphasized the importance of due diligence, stating that when historical matters are debated, the city has a responsibility to ensure accuracy. He noted discrepancies in the timeline, including that General Robert E. Lee died in 1870, the City was established in 1920, and Lee Street first appeared in records in 1949. He stated that these gaps highlight the need for further research and that a definitive conclusion could not be reached during the meeting. Mayor Williams then opened the floor for public comment. Public Comments in Favor: Anthony Ford expressed support for the name change, noting that many people are unaware that Stockbridge is considered the ancestral home of the King family. He described a vision of creating a Martin Luther King Sr. Heritage Trail on one side of downtown and Martin Luther King Jr. Way on the other, both connecting to Rock Quarry Road, where Dr. King Sr.’s father historically worked. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander provided additional context regarding the broader vision, explaining that the Downtown Development Authority has discussed replacing the Statue of Liberty in Municipal Park with a statue of Martin Luther King Sr. This would create a symbolic connection between the STEM school, the statue, and Floyd Chapel Baptist Church through a multi-use trail system. Public Comments in Opposition: Coren Randazzo presented historical documentation from Henry County Weekly archives dating back to the 1800s and early 1900s, indicating references to Lee families and Lee Street as early as 1918—prior to Mayor R.E. Lee’s death in 1952. Brandon Dubs expressed concerns regarding the potential impact on local businesses and recommended that additional research be conducted before any decision is made. Chuck Dubs stated that, based on his research and work conducted by former City Councilmember Steve Cash using official City records, the street was named after the mayor, describing it as “his street” and asserting confidence in that conclusion. Marvin Gross voiced opposition to the name change and questioned the need to alter what he considered an important part of Stockbridge’s history. 6|Page The discussion highlighted significant uncertainty regarding the origin of the street name, with multiple theories presented, including connections to local Lee families, pre1952 references, and the former mayor. Given the conflicting historical information and timeline discrepancies, Mayor Pro Tem Alexander made a motion to defer the item to allow additional time for staff research. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to defer the street name change to a future meeting to allow for additional due diligence and research. Councilmember Cloud seconded the motion. Vote: The motion passed 4–1, with Councilmember Barber voting in opposition. Councilmember Barber explained her dissent, reiterating the need for a comprehensive downtown redevelopment plan and expressing concern about making decisions that impact constituents without sufficient planning and verified historical information. NEW BUSINESS Council moved the de-annexation cases to after executive session due to attorney-client privileged legal memorandums that needed to be discussed first. Motion: Councilmember Gantt moved to move executive session before new business to discuss the de-annexation items. Councilmember Cloud seconded. The motion passed 5-0. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion: Councilmember Gantt moved to adjourn to executive session for real estate, personnel, litigation, and cyber security matters. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 5-0. [Executive session held] Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to adjourn executive session and reconvene regular session. Councilmember Berry seconded. The motion passed 50. DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-01 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 9 Following executive session discussion of attorney-client privileged legal documents, Councilmember Gantt explained that council had received detailed legal authority based on state code regarding the legality of the de-annexation requests. Motion: Councilmember Gantt moved to deny de-annexation case DX-2026-01. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 4-0-1, with Councilmember Barber abstaining, stating she didn't have enough information to vote. 7|Page DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-02 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 10 Motion: Councilmember Gantt moved to deny de-annexation case DX-2026-02 based on the legal explanation received in executive session. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander seconded. The motion passed 4-0-1, with Councilmember Barber abstaining for lack of sufficient information. Councilmember Gantt clarified for the record that council had received a detailed 4page attorney-client privileged legal document providing legal authority based on state code, which informed their decision-making on both de-annexation cases. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Williams welcomed the spring weather and expressed excitement about upcoming activities in the warmer weather. He announced that council would be producing initiatives and engagement opportunities, directing citizens with questions to contact Executive Assistant Roslyn Rawls at rrawls@stockbridgega.org. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander moved to adjourn. Councilmember Berry seconded. The motion passed 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:47 PM. Respectfully submitted by: ______________________________ ______________________________ Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk Jayden L. Williams, Mayor 8|Page 9|Page Henry County Schools Stockbridge City Council District Update Dr. Cemond Robinzine Assistant Superintendent Dr. John Pace, III Superintendent District Profile • Enrollment of 42,000+ for 2025-2026 • 8th Largest District in Georgia • 53 District Schools, including Academy for Advanced Studies • Approximately 6,000 employees • Approximately 95 job families • Nearly 300 total bus routes • 2700+ students enrolled in HCS in Before & AfterSchool Enrichment (BASE) • Over 3.1 million meals (breakfast & lunch) served first semester SY 25-26 WHO IS HENRY? Updates to PSO Metrics HCS On The RISE! Stockbridge Elementary School Demonstrated Significant Academic Progress by Exiting Federal Improvement Designated Status (TSI) 24-25 SY GMAS Proficient+ Growth by School Austin Road Elementary 3rd Reading +22 5th Science +15 Cotton Indian Elementary Fairview Elementary 3rd Reading +16 4th Reading +8 4th Math +16 Red Oak Elementary 4th Reading +17 5th Reading +7 4th ELA +10 3rd Math +11 Pleasant Grove Elementary 3rd Reading +7 5th Reading +5 3rd ELA +12 4th ELA +19 5th ELA +10 4th Math +16 5th Science +15 4th Reading +25 4th ELA +17 4th Math +9 Woodland Elementary Smith-Barnes Elementary 4th ELA+7 5th ELA +5 5th Math +4 5th Science +15 Austin Road Middle 7th Reading +5 6th ELA +5 7th Math +12 8th Math +7 Algebra +28 3rd Reading +6 4th Reading +3 5th Reading +4 Pate’s Creek Elementary Woodland Middle 6th Math +5 3rd Reading +7 4th Reading +14​ 4th ELA +6 3rd Math +8 4th Math +9 Stockbridge Elementary 3rd Reading +4 Stockbridge Middle Woodland High Biology +6 History +4 6th Reading +6 7th Reading +11 6th ELA +8 7th ELA +5 6th Math +7 8th Science +5 Stockbridge High Reading +4 Algebra +5 Biology +18 2025 2025 2026 2026 2026 2026 Henry County, GA Overview Legend Parcels Roads 1,175 ft Parcel ID Property Address District S26-02027000 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD City/Stockbridge TAD Class Exempt Owner STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC Acreage 6.12 Address FACILITIES AUTHORITY 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Land $765,000 Value: Building $5,774,000 Value: Misc $110,380 Value: Total $6,717,100 Value: Last 2 Sales Date Price Reason Qual 3/23/2021 $0 VH U 11/21/2005 $0 U U Parcel lines depicted on the maps do not re ect a true and exact representation of property boundaries and should not be relied upon for said purpose. Property boundary lines are depicted on recorded plats available at the Henry County courthouse or can be determined by employing the services of a licensed surveyor. Date created: 2/20/2026 Last Data Uploaded: 2/20/2026 1:13:03 AM Developed by Hi ll R µ Old Stagecoach Rd North Davis Dr Va lle y d k Oa Collier N Rd Cr S Cr k Oa Rd s vi Da g Bi Dr k Oa e dg Ri yer C on Old sR d Rn Landover Dr B Stapleton Dr ge rid C Ct rk Pa ub Cl t Taylor Dr Tr Cr nta East Atla w ie kv oc St Club Creek Cr Duvall Dr Ceresa Dr Miller Rd Rock Quarry Rd Nolan St First St Tahoe Trail Jackson Dr Chur Wy on k Yu Welch St Silent Ave Ra ilr oa d Main Street & DDA Districts Walker St Fairhaven Blvd Legend City of Stockbridge Childs St Breezy Hill Wk r Tramore Ps eD Creekview Ov nt mo r Tina Hely Ct Ct Misty Ridge Tl Main Street Boundary Moonlit Cresce Tram o re Addy Cv South Lee St St y sW Wilson Av Ro se nw g nin Jen Ra ilr oa d Wilson St Tr a Cr Second St Shefield Ct Glynn Addy Dr Spring St Berry S t ald C r Fairhaven Ct ch St Appleton Bv va No DDA District Railway Lane Dr State Route 42 Harrell Dr Tye St. Hillcrest St Mimosa Dr Bow Beacon St en S t McCain Creek Tl Ward St Love St Mann Blvd West Burke St Burke St Center St Club Dr Bryant St Lovejoy St North Lee St Turning Pt Parkwood Dr Rd Pl No Name Club PARCELS WITH ADDRESSES OF N LEE ST OR S LEE ST Parcel ID S26-01020000 S26-01021001 S26-01022000 S26-01023000 S26-01024000 S26-02002000 S26-02003000 S26-02004000 S26-02006000 S26-04007000 S26-04009000 S26-04010000 S26-04011000 S26-04012000 S27-01013000 S27-01014000 Address 109 NORTH LEE ST 111 NORTH LEE ST 113 NORTH LEE ST 115 NORTH LEE ST 117 NORTH LEE ST 110 NORTH LEE ST 112 NORTH LEE ST 114 NORTH LEE ST 118 NORTH LEE ST 109 S LEE ST 108 S LEE ST 106 S LEE ST 0 S LEE ST 102 S LEE ST 0 S LEE ST 500 S LEE ST Owner Names CARRABELLE REAL ESTATE LLC DUNBAR COREY DRILLOT KRISTIE BECK GROCE MARVIN F SANDERS JUNE T M STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY STOCKBRIDGE ELEM SCHOOL HENRY COUNTY BD OF EDUCATION DUBBS CHARLES L JR & LYNDA A CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE READY MIX USA LLC READY MIX USA LLC RE-NAMING OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY: STREET RENAMING OF NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET Ryan Anderson, MPPA, CPM Director, Community Development Stockbridge City Work Session Meeting March 31, 2026 Genealogy of Street Naming Concept Common Sources of Street Names • Street names reflect a community’s history, land ownership, geography, and culture • Serve as a “genealogy” of how a town developed over time Provide insight into the people and features that shaped early growth How Street Names Developed • Often emerged organically through local use • Not always established through formal government action • Later adopted into maps, legal descriptions, and official records • Individuals & Leaders: Landowners, families, civic or national figures • Geographical Features: Hills, rivers, and natural landscape • Trades & Occupations: Reflect historical economic activity • Developers: Names assigned during subdivision and platting • Trees & Natural Elements: Common in residential areas • Historical & Cultural Landmarks: Churches, mills, community features Researching Street Name Origins • Local archives, newspapers, and historical societies • Historic maps (e.g., Sanborn maps, early atlases) • City directories and land ownership records • Tax assessor data and official municipal records • Supplemental sources (e.g., cemetery or genealogical records) Purpose And Rationale • PURPOSE: The City of Stockbridge proposes to rename North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way to honor his legacy and contributions to the City, State of Georgia, and the nation. • REQUEST: City Council is requested to consider adoption of a resolution to rename the subject corridor. • RATIONALE: Recognize the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr; Provide a unifying and recognizable name within the downtown area; Align with common municipal practices honoring nationally significant figures • PLANNING CONTEXT: Corridor located within historic downtown Stockbridge; Provides connectivity between residential, commercial, and civic uses; Functions as a key north–south route in the City’s street network • ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS: Due to community discussion regarding the origin of “Lee Street,” the City conducted additional historical research to provide a fact-based foundation for Council consideration. North Lee Street and South Lee Street Today LOCATION North Lee Street and South Lee Street are located in historic downtown Stockbridge and function as a key north–south connector across North Henry Boulevard (U.S. 23). CORRIDOR FUNCTION The corridor connects residential, commercial, and civic areas while serving as a central spine that provides access to key community destinations, extending from North Henry Boulevard north to Ceresea Drive and south to Rock Quarry Road. KEY DESTINATIONS Key destinations along the corridor include Stockbridge City Hall, the Stockbridge Amphitheater, First Baptist Church of Stockbridge, Stockbridge Elementary School, and Patrick Henry educational facilities. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The corridor developed in the late 1800s to early 1900s, influenced by railroad expansion and early town growth, with evidence confirming Lee Street as an established route by the early twentieth century. DEVELOPMENT PATTERN The corridor features a mix of residential and institutional uses, including an early structure at 108 South Lee Street (c. 1900), with irregular lot patterns reflecting historic land division practices. 4 PARCEL MAP FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET 6 PARCEL SPREADSHEET FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET 7 Historical Context Early Development of Stockbridge • Settlement began in 1826 with the establishment of Concord Methodist Church, forming the nucleus of the community • Early village development included homes, general stores, and essential services, supporting a growing rural population • Stockbridge functioned as a key crossroads along regional routes, including the corridor now known as U.S. Highway 23 • The arrival of the railroad in 1881–1882 shifted development southward and accelerated growth around the new town center • By the late 1800s, Stockbridge emerged as a local commercial and civic hub within Henry County • The town was incorporated in 1895 and later incorporated as a city in 1920 • Early street patterns developed organically, with roadways following land ownership and settlement patterns • By the early 20th century, Stockbridge was a small but established community with civic institutions, businesses, and approximately 400 residents • Historical maps and census data reflect steady, incremental growth centered around transportation corridors Early Cartographic References to Stockbridge • Stockbridge appears on 1863 and 1865 historical maps, confirming its presence as an established settlement prior to incorporation • Early maps identify Stockbridge as a recognized rural center and transportation node within Henry County • The community was positioned along key regional routes connecting Atlanta, McDonough, Jonesboro, and surrounding areas • Nineteenth-century maps typically documented active settlements, crossroads, and economic centers, reinforcing Stockbridge’s early significance • Early transportation routes developed organically, following travel patterns, property lines, and natural features • These routes formed the foundation for later street alignments and development patterns • Streets such as Lee Street likely originated from these early travel corridors and land divisions, rather than formal planning actions • Cartographic evidence shows that the framework for street development existed well before 1918, when Lee Street appears in documented records Early Lee Family References in Henry County • A 1879 public notice in The Henry County Weekly references the estate of Samuel Lee, including a property known as “Lee’s Mill” • The property was located within the 12th Land District of Henry County, an area tied to early settlement patterns • Mill properties were typically economic and community hubs, indicating the Lee family’s role in local commerce • This record confirms the Lee family’s presence in the region decades before Lee Street is documented (1918) • In rural communities, roads and corridors were often named after landowners, families, or landmarks such as mills • The reference to Lee’s Mill suggests an established geographic association with the Lee name • Estate documentation indicates significant land ownership, contributing to early parcel and roadway formation Census Documentation (1880–1950) •Federal census records confirm the long-term presence of the Lee family in Henry County and the Stockbridge area •1880 Census: Samuel Lee listed as head of household; Robert E. Lee recorded as a child •1910 Census: Robert E. Lee documented as an independent adult resident, showing continuity in the community •1920 Census: Lee family present at the time of Stockbridge’s incorporation as a city •1930 Census: Continued residency reflects long-term community establishment •1950 Census: Robert E. Lee remains a resident, demonstrating multi-decade continuity (approx. 70 years) Documented Existence of Lee Street (1918) The earliest confirmed reference to Lee Street appears in a 1918 legal notice published in The Henry County Weekly Notice dates: • October 11, 1918 • October 25, 1918 • November 8, 1918 Property description includes: • “…bounded north by J. T. Mays, east by Thurman Askew, south by Mrs. Sallie Lee, west by Lee Street.” Early Development Along Lee Street Key Evidence • Structure at 108 South Lee Street (c. 1900) confirms early development along the corridor • Property size (~3 acres) reflects significant early landholding • Development patterns indicate buildings were constructed along existing roadways • Suggests Lee Street was established by the early 1900s Lee Family Connection • Property and deed records link land ownership to the Lee family • Location aligns with 1918 legal references to adjacent Lee-owned parcels • Demonstrates a direct geographic relationship between the Lee family and the corridor • Deed and ownership records confirm Lee family land ownership, including William Jackson Lee Mayoral History Mayoral History • Joseph Mann served as mayor (1925–1926) during early municipal growth • R. E. Lee served as mayor in the late 1940s–early 1950s and was a long-time resident and community leader • His son, William Jackson “Dub” Lee, later served on City Council (1958) and as mayor in the early 1960s • Both were associated with the Southern Railway System and active in civic and community organizations Community Contributions • Expansion of electric service and utility systems • Improvements to road paving and transportation infrastructure • Development of the municipal water system • Supported Stockbridge’s transition to a modernized municipality Key Finding • Lee Street is documented as existing by 1918, prior to R. E. Lee’s mayoral service • Indicates the street predates mid-20th century leadership • Suggests the name was not derived from a commemorative naming action Municipal Records and Mapping Municipal Records and Mapping • 1948 City Council minutes note that Stockbridge did not have an official municipal map • City Clerk was directed to coordinate with the U.S. Census Bureau to provide mapping at a later date Planning Context • Early streets and layouts were often not formally documented in small municipalities • Roadways developed through customary use, property boundaries, and travel routes • Street names were commonly based on local landowners, families, or landmarks Key Implication • The absence of a formal record does not indicate a lack of origin • Instead, it reflects limited recordkeeping practices during early development • Helps explain why no official naming record for Lee Street exists Later Documentation of Lee Street Planning & Mapping Records • 1962 Zoning Map identifies Lee Street as part of the City’s established urban framework • 1978 Real Estate Atlas confirms roadway location through mapped and aerial data • 2004 aerial imagery and parcel maps show continued development along the corridor Key Findings • Lee Street is consistently documented across multiple decades of mapping • The roadway maintained its alignment, name, and function over time • Recognized in both public planning documents and private mapping resources • Demonstrates Lee Street as a stable and integrated component of the City’s network Historical Timeline of Stockbridge & Lee Street Development Concord Methodist Church established Civil War activity in Stockbridge 1863 1826 Johnson’s Georgia and Alabama Map (A.J. Johnson); Stockbridge identified as a recognized settlement The Henry County Weekly publishes notice of estate sale for Samuel Lee, referencing Lee’s Mill in the 12th Land District 1865 1864 Lindenkohl Map (U.S. Government) (Stockbridge shown within regional transportation network) Southern Railroad constructed 1880 1879 1895 1881–1882 U.S. Census documents Samuel Lee household (Robert E. Lee listed as a child) Stockbridge incorporated as a town Historical Timeline of Stockbridge & Lee Street Development Early residence established along Lee Street, confirming corridor development Stockbridge Baptist Church established 1910 ~1900 Stockbridge not listed as separate municipality (Census); Reflects preincorporation rural status Stockbridge incorporated as a city; Population ~386 residents (U.S. Census) 1918 1917 Lee Street documented in legal notices; Established roadway used in property descriptions Population ~392 residents (Henry County District 775) 1927 1920 Robert E. Lee begins service as Mayor 1939 1930 Henry County Highway Planning Map; Population ~443 residents; Development centered on transportation routes Historical Timeline of Stockbridge & Lee Street Development U.S. Census confirms continued residency of Robert E. Lee William Jackson “Dub” Lee serves as Mayor 1952 ~1950 1962 1958–1960s Death of R.E.Lee Stockbridge Urban Area Zoning District Map (Lee Street formally recognized in zoning framework) Established Early • Lee Street existed by at least 1918, confirmed by legal notices • Referenced as a defined boundary, indicating active use Consistent Documentation • Appears in legal records, property data, and mapping over time • Maintained name, alignment, and function for decades Lee Family Connection • Lee family owned land along or near the corridor Summary of Findings • Records confirm presence of individuals such as William Jackson Lee • Establishes a direct geographic and historical link Not Named After Mayors • Street predates R. E. Lee and William “Dub” Lee • Name existed decades before their public service Historical Naming Pattern • Streets commonly named after landowners or local families • Naming often occurred informally, not by ordinance Early Origin & Development • Lee Street likely originated during early town development (late 1800s–early 1900s) • Established through organic growth patterns, not formal designation Land Ownership Connection • Lee family owned property along or near the corridor • Records reference individuals such as Sallie Lee and Martin Parks Lee • Strong evidence linking the street name to local landholding patterns Analysis Common Historical Practice • Streets were typically named after: • Adjacent landowners • Local families • Recognizable landmarks (mills, churches, etc.) • Naming was often informal and community-based Limitations in Documentation • Early records (maps, ordinances) were not consistently preserved • No definitive record identifying who the street was named after Key Determination • Lee Street predates mid-20th century civic leaders • Unlikely named for R. E. Lee or William “Dub” Lee Contact the U.S. Postal Service to notify the Addressing Office of the new street name so that it can update its addressing system. United States Postal Service Notification Requirements Notify the property owners of the sixteen (16) properties along North Lee Street and South Lee Street so that they can change their home and business addresses. Residents may also report their new addresses to the Stockbridge Post Office, or they may submit “Growth Management Assistance Request Forms.” BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE M.L.K. FAMILY MARTIN LUTHER KING, SENIOR Life in Stockbridge He was born and raised in Stockbridge, and he preached at the historic Floyd Chapel Baptist Church at 104 First Street. Commemorative Street Plaque Placed at Floyd Baptist Church in his honor. Street Named in His Honor The City of Stockbridge renamed three streets in his honor in Downtown Stockbridge, located along the railroad tracks (North Berry Street, South Berry Street, and Railroad Street) to “Martin Luther King, Sr. Heritage Trail” on September 14, 2025. Commemorative Statue Proposed by the Downtown Development Authority to be located in a City-owned park at 102 South Lee Street, adjacent to the Stockbridge police headquarters. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE M.L.K. FAMILY MARTIN LUTHER KING, JUNIOR: ~ Led the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955--This was a pivotal event in the civil rights movement in the U.S. ~ Co-Founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in 1957—This organization played a significant role in the civil rights movement. ~ Delivered the “I Have a Dream” Speech in 1963—This speech during the March on Washington advocated for civil rights. ~ Was Instrumental in the Civil Rights Act of 1964—His efforts contributed to the passage of this landmark legislation to outlaw discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. ~ Received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964—He was honored for his non-violent struggle for civil rights for the African American population. Policy Consideration • Council is requested to review the historical findings and analysis • Provide policy direction on the proposed renaming Key Context Staff Recommendation • Lee Street originated from early development patterns • Likely tied to local land ownership—not formal naming action • Name predates later civic leaders associated with the Lee family Important Distinction • Proposed renaming is a policy decision • Not a correction of the historical record Council Consideration • Alignment with: • Community identity • Historical recognition • Cultural significance Recommended Action (If Approved) • Approve resolution to rename: North & South Lee Street → Martin Luther King, Jr. Way • Direct staff to proceed with: • Interagency coordination (County, USPS, emergency services) • Property owner notification • Updates to City records, GIS, and mapping systems • Installation of new signage Thank You Ryan Anderson, MPPA, CPM Director, Community Development Randerson@stockbridg ega.org STAFF REPORT: PROPOSED STREET NAME CHANGE – NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET TO MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY Community Development Department Planning & Zoning Division Contents Request..................................................................................................................... 2 Location ................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of Historical Research ................................................................................... 6 Common Sources of Street Names ........................................................................... 7 Researching the Origin of Street Names .................................................................. 7 Historical Context ..................................................................................................... 8 Early Development of Stockbridge.............................................................................. 8 Early Cartographic References to Stockbridge .......................................................... 10 Early Lee Family References in Henry County .......................................................... 13 Census Documentation (1880–1950) .......................................................................... 14 Documented Existence of Lee Street (1918) ............................................................... 16 Early Development Along Lee Street ......................................................................... 18 Mayoral History ...................................................................................................... 20 Municipal Records and Mapping .............................................................................. 21 Later Documentation of Lee Street ........................................................................... 24 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................. 28 Analysis .................................................................................................................. 29 Proposed Action ...................................................................................................... 30 Staff Recommendation............................................................................................. 31 Historical Timeline .................................................................................................. 32 Historical Timeline (cont.) ........................................................................................ 33 Historical Timeline (cont.) ........................................................................................ 34 Page 1 of 34 Request The City Council is requested to consider adoption of a resolution to rename North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. The proposed name change is intended to recognize and honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose leadership during the Civil Rights Movement had a profound and lasting impact on communities throughout the United States and the State of Georgia. Designation of a roadway in his honor represents a commemorative action consistent with practices adopted by many municipalities to acknowledge individuals of national and historical significance. The subject corridor is located within the historic downtown area of the City of Stockbridge and serves as an important local street providing connectivity between residential neighborhoods, commercial properties, and key civic destinations. As a continuous north-south route, the corridor functions as part of the City’s established street network and contributes to both local access and community identity. Due to community discussion and varying perspectives regarding the origin and historical significance of the existing street name, the City initiated additional research to better understand the background of Lee Street. This effort was intended to provide an objective, fact-based foundation to inform the City Council’s consideration of the proposed renaming. Accordingly, this report compiles and evaluates available historical documentation, including newspaper archives, property records, census data, and municipal history, to identify the earliest known references to Lee Street and assess its likely origin. The findings are presented to assist the City Council in making an informed policy decision that considers both historical context and community values. Location North Lee Street and South Lee Street are located within the historic downtown area of the City of Stockbridge and run generally north–south through the community, forming a continuous local corridor. As illustrated in the map below, the corridor extends across North Henry Boulevard (U.S. Highway 23), which serves as a major regional transportation route connecting Stockbridge to the broader Atlanta metropolitan area. This intersection represents a key node within the city, linking local circulation routes with a principal arterial roadway. The Lee Street corridor lies within an area that historically developed during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, following the expansion of rail transportation and associated commercial activity in Henry County. Development patterns in this area were heavily influenced by proximity to transportation infrastructure, with streets such as Lee Street serving as connectors between residential areas, local businesses, and civic destinations. Page 2 of 34 As shown in the aerial imagery, Lee Street functions as a key connector across North Henry Boulevard (U.S. Highway 23), which is a major regional arterial linking Stockbridge to the Atlanta metropolitan area. The corridor provides direct access to several important civic and community destinations, including: • • • • • Stockbridge City Hall Stockbridge Amphitheater First Baptist Church of Stockbridge Stockbridge Elementary School Patrick Henry educational facilities This concentration of civic, institutional, and community-serving uses highlights the corridor’s role as a central spine within the historic downtown area. Notably, historical records indicate that the first building associated with First Baptist Church of Stockbridge was dedicated in 1920 and was located across Lee Street, further confirming that the roadway was already established and recognized within the community by the early twentieth century. This provides additional historical context demonstrating that Lee Street functioned as a defined and important corridor during the period of early civic and institutional development in Stockbridge. South of North Henry Boulevard, the corridor transitions into a mix of residential and quasiinstitutional development patterns, including multifamily housing and neighborhood-scale streets. North of the corridor, development reflects earlier residential patterns and smaller-scale land divisions typical of early town growth. A particularly significant property along the corridor is located at 108 South Lee Street, currently operating as Pinehurst Catering & Events Facility. Based on available tax assessor data, this structure dates to approximately circa 1900, making it one of the earliest documented developed properties along Lee Street. The presence of this structure is important from both a historical and planning perspective: • • • It demonstrates that development was already occurring along Lee Street by the turn of the twentieth century; It reinforces that the roadway was functioning as an established access route prior to modern subdivision and zoning practices; and It reflects a traditional development pattern, where structures were constructed along existing roadways that served as primary corridors for movement and access. The surrounding parcel configuration further supports this pattern, with properties fronting directly onto Lee Street and exhibiting irregular lot shapes consistent with early land division practices rather than later planned subdivisions. Because of its location within the historic core of the city, Lee Street has long been an integral component of Stockbridge’s transportation network and community identity. The corridor reflects Page 3 of 34 the City’s early development pattern, linking historic residential areas, civic institutions, and later commercial growth along North Henry Boulevard. Taken together, the physical layout, surrounding land uses, and presence of early structures such as 108 South Lee Street, along with documented institutional development such as the 1920 church site, provide strong evidence that Lee Street developed organically as part of the City’s initial growth framework and has remained a continuous and significant corridor within the community over time. Page 4 of 34 Page 5 of 34 Purpose of Historical Research During discussions regarding the proposed renaming of North Lee Street and South Lee Street, members of the community expressed differing perspectives regarding the origin and historical significance of the name “Lee Street.” These differing viewpoints prompted the need for additional research to ensure that the City Council’s consideration of the proposed name change is informed by accurate and objective historical context. Two primary interpretations have been suggested: 1. The street may have been named for Robert E. Lee, the Confederate military leader, reflecting a broader historical pattern in which streets and public spaces across the southern United States were named after prominent figures associated with the Civil War era. 2. The street may have been named for R. E. Lee, a local civic leader who served as mayor of the City of Stockbridge during the mid-twentieth century and who is associated with infrastructure improvements and municipal development within the community. In addition to these interpretations, preliminary findings suggested the possibility that the name could also be associated with local Lee family land ownership, which was common in early town development patterns where streets were informally named after adjacent property owners or prominent local families. Because of these differing interpretations—and the potential historical, cultural, and community implications associated with each—staff conducted a focused historical investigation to identify the earliest documented reference to Lee Street and to better understand its likely origin. This research effort included a review of multiple historical sources, including: • • • • • Archived issues of The Henry County Weekly and other historical newspapers; Property records, tax assessor data, and deed references; Census records and draft registration documents identifying local residents; Municipal records, including City Council minutes and infrastructure-related documentation; and Historical maps and aerial imagery, where available. The primary objective of this research was to establish a reliable historical timeline for the existence of Lee Street and to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to attribute the street name to a specific individual or historical figure. This analysis is intended to provide the City Council with a fact-based foundation for decisionmaking by distinguishing between documented historical evidence and community interpretation. The findings do not advocate for a particular outcome but instead clarify the historical context to support an informed and transparent policy decision regarding the proposed street renaming. Page 6 of 34 Genealogy of Street Naming Street names often function as a form of “genealogy” for a community, reflecting its historical development, land ownership patterns, geography, and cultural influences. In many cases, street names provide insight into the individuals, features, and activities that shaped a town’s early growth and identity. Historically, particularly in small towns and rural communities, street naming was not always the result of formal governmental action. Instead, names frequently emerged organically based on local usage and recognition. As communities expanded, these informal names were often adopted into official records, maps, and legal descriptions. Common Sources of Street Names Street names are typically derived from several widely recognized sources: • • • • • • Individuals and Community Leaders: Streets may be named after local landowners, prominent families, civic leaders, or nationally recognized figures (e.g., Washington, Lincoln). Geographical Features: Names often reflect natural features such as topography, waterways, or landscape characteristics (e.g., Hill Street, River Road, Water Street). Trades and Occupations: Some street names originate from historical economic activities or trades associated with the area (e.g., Dyer, Vintner, or similar occupational references). Developers and Subdivision Planning: In more formally planned developments, particularly during the twentieth century, developers often proposed street names during the subdivision and platting process. Vegetation and Natural Elements: Residential areas frequently include names based on trees, plants, or natural features (e.g., Oak, Elm, Pine). Historical and Cultural References: Certain street names reflect historic structures, institutions, or cultural landmarks (e.g., Church Street, Mill Road), preserving elements of local heritage. Researching the Origin of Street Names Determining the origin of a street name typically requires a multi-source research approach. Common resources include: • • • • Local Historical Archives: Libraries, historical societies, and newspaper archives provide valuable contextual information. Historic Maps and Atlases: Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps and early municipal or county maps can help establish when a street first appeared. City Directories and Land Records: These sources can identify early landowners and development patterns associated with a street. Government and Official Records: Tax assessor data, deed records, and municipal documents often provide evidence of land ownership and street references. Page 7 of 34 • Supplemental Records: Additional sources, such as cemetery records or genealogical data, may provide supporting context regarding individuals associated with a location. Historical Context Early Development of Stockbridge The origins of the community now known as Stockbridge date to the early nineteenth century. In 1826, a small group of settlers established one of the area’s first organized institutions, Concord Methodist Church, which became the nucleus of early settlement in northern Henry County. Among the founding members of the congregation were P. Z. Ward, Thomas A. Ward, James W. Wilkerson, D. L. Coleman, and James Coker. The church was located near the present-day intersection of East Atlanta Road and Stagecoach Road and served as a focal point for community life in the surrounding rural area. Over time, a small village developed around the church. Early residents constructed modest log cabins and homesteads, including pioneers such as Sam Skelton, Lewis Coleman, Mrs. Harriet Brannan, and John Friddle. Recognizing the potential for growth in the area, J. T. Bond purchased approximately forty acres of nearby land and established several essential services for the developing settlement, including a general store, shoe shop, and post office. As the community expanded, the village also welcomed its first medical practitioners, Dr. Hightower and Dr. Hambrick, who provided much-needed healthcare to residents. During the Civil War, Henry County and the surrounding region experienced military activity due to its strategic location along key transportation routes. In late October 1864, the Kentucky “Orphan Brigade,” a Confederate unit led by former Vice President John C. Breckinridge, established its headquarters in Stockbridge while scouting roads southeast of Atlanta. At the time, Stockbridge served as an important crossroads along the main road from Atlanta to Macon, now known as U.S. Highway 23, with additional roads connecting the community to nearby settlements such as Buckhead and Decatur. Following the Civil War, development in the area remained relatively limited until the 1880s. A significant turning point occurred in 1881 when representatives of the Southern Railroad Company explored the possibility of constructing a rail line through the village. Negotiations with local landowners were initially unsuccessful; however, later that year John W. Grant and George W. Adair acquired land located approximately one to two miles south of the original village site and facilitated the construction of the railroad. The arrival of the railroad dramatically reshaped the community. Because the original village location was no longer practical in relation to the new rail alignment, residents began relocating closer to the new train station. Construction activity accelerated, and by 1882 the first houses within what would become the city center were constructed, including homes built by J. T. Bond and W. W. Ward. The railroad quickly stimulated economic activity and encouraged further development of homes, businesses, and civic institutions. Page 8 of 34 By the late nineteenth century, Stockbridge had begun to emerge as a small but active commercial center within Henry County. In 1890, the Harmony Masonic Lodge relocated to the growing town, reflecting the increasing importance of the community as a gathering place for civic and social organizations. The community of Stockbridge continued to develop during the nineteenth century as part of the agricultural and transportation network of Henry County. The expansion of railroad infrastructure and regional commerce contributed to the gradual development of a town center. Stockbridge was officially incorporated as a town in 1895 and later incorporated as a city on August 6, 1920. During this early period of development, streets were often established as settlement expanded around privately owned land parcels. Street names were commonly derived from local landowners, prominent families, geographic features, or early civic leaders associated with the area. Because many early municipal records and maps were not preserved, it is not uncommon for the precise origin of street names in small communities to remain uncertain. By the time of its incorporation as a city in 1920, Stockbridge had grown into a modest but thriving community. Contemporary accounts describe a town of approximately 400 residents with five churches, two schools, a bank, a telephone exchange, a steam ginnery, several retail stores, an electric light plant, two cotton warehouses, a hotel, a lumber yard, two garages, and a substantial brick school building with an auditorium and multiple classrooms. The town was served by two physicians, a lawyer, and a local police officer, reflecting the emergence of essential civic and professional services. By the early twentieth century, available census data further illustrates the scale and character of Stockbridge’s development. The Town of Stockbridge does not appear as a separately listed municipality in the 1910 U.S. Census, indicating that it had not yet been formally recognized as an incorporated town at that time. However, by 1920, the town is recorded with a population of approximately 386 residents, and by 1930, the population had modestly increased to approximately 392 residents, as documented within Henry County’s District 775. This limited population growth over the decade reflects a small but stable community that had transitioned from its rural origins into an incorporated municipality. The relatively modest size of the town suggests a close-knit, locally oriented community, where development patterns and street naming practices were likely influenced by local landowners, civic leaders, and longstanding families rather than formalized planning processes. Additional historical mapping further illustrates the gradual growth of Stockbridge during the early twentieth century. A 1939 Henry County highway planning map, prepared by the Georgia Division of Highway Planning, identifies Stockbridge with a reported population of approximately 443 residents. This increase from the 1920 and 1930 census figures reflects steady but modest growth during this period. The map also depicts the town’s development pattern centered around key transportation routes, reinforcing the importance of roadway and rail infrastructure in shaping the community’s layout. The relatively compact footprint shown on the map further supports the characterization of Stockbridge as a small, close-knit town where development occurred incrementally around existing roads and locally owned land. Page 9 of 34 Together, these developments illustrate how Stockbridge evolved from a small rural settlement centered around a church into a growing municipal community and commercial hub within Henry County. Early Cartographic References to Stockbridge Historical maps provide important contextual evidence of the early presence and development of the Stockbridge community within Henry County during the nineteenth century and help illustrate the foundational conditions under which its street network later emerged. One of the earliest known cartographic references appears in Johnson’s Georgia and Alabama Map (1863), created by Alvin Jewett Johnson and published by Johnson and Ward in New York. This map identifies Stockbridge as a recognized settlement within Henry County during the midnineteenth century, indicating that the community had already achieved a level of regional significance prior to the Civil War. Additional cartographic documentation appears in the map titled “Southern Georgia and Part of South Carolina” (1865), prepared by Adolph Lindenkohl and published by the United States Government Printing Office. This map also depicts Stockbridge and illustrates its geographic position in relation to early transportation routes connecting nearby communities such as Atlanta, Jonesboro, Fayetteville, and McDonough. From a planning and historical geography perspective, the inclusion of Stockbridge on these maps is significant. Nineteenth-century maps typically identified locations that functioned as established settlements, crossroads, or nodes of economic and transportation activity. The presence of Stockbridge on both the 1863 and 1865 maps indicates that the community was already functioning as a recognized rural center within the regional network of roads and agricultural landholdings. These maps also provide insight into early transportation patterns that influenced the development of the town. During this period, roadways were not formally planned or engineered in the modern sense, but instead evolved organically based on travel routes between farms, mills, churches, and neighboring towns. As a result, early roads often followed property lines, natural topography, and existing paths of movement, forming the basis for later street alignments. This pattern of organic development is particularly relevant when considering the origin of streets such as Lee Street. In small nineteenth-century communities, streets were frequently established along existing travel routes or property boundaries and were often named informally based on nearby landowners, prominent families, or recognizable landmarks. Over time, these informal routes became fixed as part of the town’s permanent street network. The cartographic evidence therefore demonstrates that the spatial framework necessary for street development—including travel corridors, land division, and settlement clustering—was already in place decades before Lee Street appears in documented legal records in 1918. This reinforces the conclusion that Lee Street likely originated during this earlier period of gradual community formation rather than as part of a later, formally documented naming action. Page 10 of 34 Additionally, the maps highlight Stockbridge’s role as a connecting point between larger regional destinations, particularly along routes leading toward Atlanta and Macon. This positioning would have increased the importance of local roads and corridors within the town, further supporting the early establishment of streets that facilitated movement, access, and property development. Taken together, these cartographic sources provide critical historical context for understanding the early development of Stockbridge and the evolution of its street network. They illustrate that the community’s physical and transportation framework was established well before formal incorporation and support the broader conclusion that street naming and alignment, including Lee Street, likely developed organically as part of the town’s early growth pattern. Figure 1: Johnson’s Georgia and Alabama Map (1863) showing the location of Stockbridge within Henry County. Map by Alvin J. Johnson, published by Johnson and Ward, New York. Page 11 of 34 Figure 2: Southern Georgia and Part of South Carolina,” 1865. Map by Adolph Lindenkohl, published by the United States Government Printing Office. The map identifies Stockbridge within Henry County and illustrates early transportation routes connecting the community with Atlanta and surrounding towns Page 12 of 34 Early Lee Family References in Henry County One of the earliest documented references to the Lee family in the region appears in The Henry County Weekly dated February 21, 1879. A public notice published in the newspaper referenced the proposed sale of property belonging to the estate of Samuel Lee, which included a mill property commonly referred to as Lee’s Mill. The property was located within the original 12th Land District of Henry County. The notice stated in part: “Application will be made to the Court of Ordinary of Henry County for leave to sell certain mill property… belonging to the estate of Samuel Lee.” From a historical and economic perspective, this reference is significant. Mill properties during the nineteenth century were typically located along key transportation routes and waterways and served as important centers of local commerce and agricultural processing. Ownership of such a facility suggests that members of the Lee family were not only landowners, but also active participants in the local economy and community structure. The identification of Lee’s Mill within the 12th Land District further indicates that the Lee family held land within the broader geographic area that would later influence the development of nearby settlements, including the Town of Stockbridge. During this period, land districts formed the foundational framework for property ownership, settlement patterns, and the eventual establishment of roads and community infrastructure. Although this record does not directly reference Lee Street, it establishes the presence of the Lee surname in Henry County several decades prior to the documented existence of Lee Street in 1918. This temporal gap is important, as it demonstrates that the Lee family was already associated with land ownership and economic activity in the region during the formative years of community development. In early rural communities, it was common for roads, landmarks, and emerging corridors to be informally named after nearby landowners, prominent families, or recognizable local features such as mills, churches, or stores. The presence of a property known as Lee’s Mill suggests that the Lee name was already geographically associated with a specific location, which could have influenced later naming conventions as the area developed. Additionally, the reference to an estate sale indicates that the Lee family’s landholdings were of sufficient size or value to require formal probate proceedings, further reinforcing their role as established landowners within the county. Such properties were often subdivided, transferred, or inherited over time, contributing to the gradual formation of roads and parcels that defined early town layouts. Taken together, this record provides important contextual evidence that the Lee family was present in Henry County well before the early twentieth century and was engaged in land ownership and economic activity. While not conclusive on its own, this early reference supports the broader Page 13 of 34 pattern observed in later records, suggesting that the name “Lee” was locally established and associated with land and development in the region prior to the formal recognition of Lee Street. Figure 3: Public notice published in The Henry County Weekly on February 21, 1879 referencing the proposed sale of Lee’s Mill property belonging to the estate of Samuel Lee in the 12th Land District of Henry County. Census Documentation (1880–1950) Federal census records provide critical primary source documentation confirming the long-term and continuous presence of individuals bearing the Lee surname within Henry County and the Stockbridge area from the late nineteenth century through the mid-twentieth century. These records offer detailed information regarding household composition, occupation, and residency, and are widely regarded as reliable historical sources due to their standardized, governmentadministered data collection. The 1880 United States Federal Census provides one of the earliest documented references to the Lee family in the area. The record identifies Samuel Lee as head of household, with Robert E. Lee listed as a child residing within the household. This establishes the presence of the Lee family in Henry County during the late nineteenth century and confirms that Robert E. Lee was raised in the local area. Page 14 of 34 By the time of the 1910 United States Federal Census, Robert E. Lee is documented as an independent adult resident within Henry County. This transition from a dependent household member to an established adult resident reflects continuity of presence within the community and suggests long-term ties to the area. The 1910 census further confirms that the Lee family remained in the region during a period of early town development and prior to the formal documentation of Lee Street. The 1920 United States Federal Census, conducted in the same year that Stockbridge was incorporated as a city, again records Robert E. Lee as a resident of the area. This record situates the Lee family within the community at a pivotal moment in its municipal development and reinforces their continued presence during a period of population growth and infrastructure expansion. The 1930 United States Federal Census continues to document Robert E. Lee as a resident of the Stockbridge area, reflecting a sustained presence into later adulthood. By this time, his long-term residency indicates that he was an established and recognized member of the community during a period of continued development and stabilization within the city. Further extending this timeline, the 1950 United States Federal Census confirms that Robert E. Lee remained a resident of Stockbridge into the mid-twentieth century. This record represents the culmination of a documented residency spanning approximately seventy years, from childhood through later adulthood. When viewed collectively, these census records establish a continuous and uninterrupted timeline of residency: • • • • • 1880 – Robert E. Lee resides in the Samuel Lee household (youth) 1910 – Robert E. Lee is documented as an adult resident in Henry County 1920 – Robert E. Lee remains a resident at the time of city incorporation 1930 – Robert E. Lee continues residence in the Stockbridge area 1950 – Robert E. Lee remains a resident of the community This sequence of federal records provides compelling evidence that the Lee family maintained a long-standing and continuous presence within the Stockbridge area across multiple decades. The duration and consistency of this residency demonstrate that the Lee family was deeply rooted in the local community during key periods of land development, infrastructure expansion, and the establishment of the city’s street network. From a historical and planning perspective, this continuity is significant. Long-term residency and generational land association are commonly observed factors in early street naming practices, particularly in small towns where roads were often informally identified by reference to nearby landowners or prominent local families. Accordingly, the census documentation supports the broader pattern observed in land records and legal notices, reinforcing the conclusion that the Lee surname was firmly established within the local area prior to the documented existence of Lee Street in 1918. Page 15 of 34 Documented Existence of Lee Street (1918) The earliest confirmed reference to Lee Street within the Town of Stockbridge appears in a series of legal notices published in 1918. A notice titled “Executors’ Sale” was filed on October 9, 1918 and subsequently published in The Henry County Weekly on the following dates: • • • October 11, 1918 October 25, 1918 November 8, 1918 The notice described the sale of property located within the Town of Stockbridge and provided the following legal description: “…one house and lot in the town of Stockbridge… bounded north by lot of J. T. Mays, east by Thurman Askew, south by Mrs. Sallie Lee lot, west by Lee Street.” The notice also referenced additional property described as being bounded in part by land owned by M. P. Lee, indicating that members of the Lee family owned property in the immediate vicinity of the street. Genealogical and historical records reviewed as part of this study indicate that M. P. Lee refers to Martin Parks Lee (1874–1939), a documented resident of Henry County and a member of the Lee family associated with Samuel James Lee and Sarah Ann Williams Lee. Census records and family documentation confirm that Martin Parks Lee was part of a multi-generational family with established roots in the Stockbridge area during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. From a historical and land use perspective, the use of Lee Street as a boundary descriptor in a formal legal notice is significant. During the early twentieth century, legal property descriptions relied on widely recognized and established physical features—such as roads, property lines, and adjacent landowners—to define parcel boundaries. The inclusion of Lee Street in this context indicates that the roadway was not only in existence, but sufficiently established and commonly understood within the community to serve as a reliable point of reference in legal transactions. Furthermore, the repeated publication of the notice over multiple weeks reinforces the legitimacy and consistency of the description. The absence of clarification or correction in subsequent publications suggests that the referenced street name was well known and unambiguous to both local residents and legal authorities at the time. The notice also provides important insight into the spatial relationship between Lee Street and surrounding land ownership. The direct reference to adjacent parcels owned by Mrs. Sallie Lee and Martin Parks Lee (M. P. Lee) indicates that members of the Lee family held property immediately adjoining or near the roadway. This proximity is notable, as it reflects a pattern commonly observed in early town development, where streets were often informally named after nearby landowners or families whose property defined the corridor. Page 16 of 34 The identification of Martin Parks Lee as a neighboring landowner strengthens the documented connection between the Lee family and the physical corridor of Lee Street. Rather than representing a symbolic or commemorative naming, the available evidence demonstrates a direct geographic relationship between the Lee family’s landholdings and the roadway itself. The combination of these factors confirms several key historical findings: 1. Lee Street was an established and recognized roadway within the Town of Stockbridge by October 1918. 2. The street name was sufficiently known to be used as a legal boundary reference in formal property transactions. 3. Members of the Lee family, including Mrs. Sallie Lee and Martin Parks Lee, owned land directly adjacent to or in close proximity to the street during this time period. 4. The street’s existence and naming likely predate 1918, as it would have required time to become commonly recognized within the community. Taken together, this evidence strongly suggests that Lee Street originated during the late nineteenth or early twentieth century as part of the town’s early development pattern. This period coincides with the expansion of Stockbridge following the arrival of the railroad and the gradual transition from a rural crossroads settlement to a more defined town center with organized streets and property boundaries. From a planning and historical context, the documentation supports the conclusion that Lee Street was not the result of a later commemorative naming action, but rather emerged organically as part of the community’s growth, likely influenced by adjacent land ownership and early settlement patterns associated with the Lee family. Page 17 of 34 Figure 4: 1918 property notice from The Henry County Weekly referencing a property boundary along Lee Street in the Town of Stockbridge. This record confirms the documented existence of Lee Street in the community by October 1918. Early Development Along Lee Street Property records provide additional evidence of early development patterns along Lee Street and further contextualize the street’s historical origin. According to Henry County tax assessor and parcel data, a structure located at 108 South Lee Street was constructed circa 1900. The property, currently operating as Pinehurst Catering and Events Facility, is situated directly along the Lee Street corridor and occupies approximately 3.03 acres, indicating a relatively substantial landholding for the time period. The existence of a developed structure at this location by 1900 suggests that Lee Street was already functioning as an established corridor by the turn of the twentieth century. In small, early railroad communities such as Stockbridge, residential and agricultural structures were typically constructed along existing access routes rather than in isolation, indicating that the roadway likely predated or developed concurrently with the structure. Historical deed and ownership records associated with this property further reinforce the presence of the Lee family in the immediate vicinity. Recorded transactions reference individuals bearing the Lee surname, including William Jackson Lee, as well as estate-related transfers involving Lee family members. Page 18 of 34 Additional documentation further confirms the presence of William Jackson Lee in the community during the mid-twentieth century. A World War II draft registration record dated October 16, 1940 identifies him as a resident of Stockbridge, Henry County, Georgia, at age 31, with a birth date of April 10, 1909. This record demonstrates that members of the Lee family continued to reside in the area well after the initial establishment of Lee Street, reinforcing a pattern of long-term community presence. Property records from 1960 further reference ownership associated with “Lee W. J. Mrs.”, which corresponds to the wife of William Jackson Lee. This designation reflects a common historical naming convention in which married women were identified in legal and property records by their husband’s name. The alignment between the draft registration record and property ownership documentation confirms continuity between residency and landholding associated with his household. Subsequent deed records, including conveyances recorded in 1995 referencing earlier ownership lineage, indicate a continuity of land ownership tied to the Lee family over time. This pattern of sustained ownership is consistent with historical landholding practices in rural and small-town Georgia, where family-owned tracts were often retained, subdivided, or transferred through estates over extended periods. The spatial relationship of this property to Lee Street is particularly significant. The parcel fronts directly onto South Lee Street and is located within the same general area described in the 1918 legal notices referencing adjacent Lee family land ownership, including properties associated with Sallie Lee and Martin Parks Lee. This geographic alignment strengthens the likelihood that Lee Street derived its name from local landowners rather than from a later municipal naming decision. When considered alongside the 1918 Executors’ Sale notice, which references Lee Street as an established boundary, the presence of a circa 1900 structure on land associated with the Lee family provides both physical and documentary evidence of early settlement and land use patterns along the corridor. From a planning and historical development perspective, this pattern is consistent with common street-naming conventions in late nineteenth and early twentieth century communities, where roadways were frequently named after prominent or adjacent landowners whose properties defined the corridor. Taken together, the existence of early development along Lee Street, the documented presence of Lee family land ownership, and the formal recognition of the street in early twentieth-century legal records collectively support the conclusion that Lee Street originated as part of the town’s early growth pattern and was likely associated with local land ownership rather than a later commemorative naming. Page 19 of 34 Mayoral History Historical records indicate that Joseph Mann served as mayor of the City of Stockbridge from 1925 to 1926, during a period of early municipal growth following the city’s incorporation in 1920. Community members have suggested that Lee Street may have been named in honor of R. E. Lee, who served as mayor during the late 1940s and early 1950s. Available historical records, including City Council meeting minutes and newspaper accounts from the period, confirm that R. E. Lee held a leadership role within the municipal government and was an active and respected figure within the local community. In addition to his service as mayor, R. E. Lee was a long-time resident of Stockbridge and was associated with the Southern Railway System, where he worked for several decades prior to his retirement. His professional career, combined with his civic involvement, positioned him as a wellknown and influential member of the community. He was also affiliated with local civic and fraternal organizations, including Masonic and community service groups, which were common centers of leadership and social organization in small towns during the mid-twentieth century. R. E. Lee’s son, William Jackson “Dub” Lee (1909–1965), continued the family’s civic involvement and leadership within the City. Historical records indicate that William Jackson Lee was elected to the Stockbridge City Council in 1958 and later served as mayor during the early 1960s. Like his father, he was employed by the Southern Railway System and was actively involved in the First Baptist Church of Stockbridge and the Stockbridge Masonic Lodge. During this period of leadership spanning two generations, the City undertook several important infrastructure improvements that contributed to the modernization of the community. One of the most notable areas of advancement was the expansion of electric service within the city. Earlier council records from the 1920s and 1930s reflect ongoing challenges related to local electric generation and distribution, including maintenance of the municipal light plant and extension of service to residents. By the mid-twentieth century, efforts to improve and expand electric service helped transition the community toward more reliable and widespread access, supporting both residential growth and emerging commercial activity. In addition, the City undertook improvements to road paving and transportation infrastructure, which were critical during a time when many small municipalities were transitioning from unpaved or minimally maintained roadways to more durable, all-weather surfaces. These improvements enhanced internal circulation within the city and strengthened connections to regional corridors, including U.S. Highway 23 (North Henry Boulevard), which served as a key route linking Stockbridge to Atlanta and surrounding communities. Mayor R. E. Lee’s tenure, along with the continued leadership of William Jackson “Dub” Lee, is also associated with the development and expansion of the municipal water system, representing a significant milestone in the City’s evolution from a rural settlement to a more fully serviced municipality. Council records from the late 1940s reference discussions related to waterworks infrastructure and financing mechanisms, including efforts to secure funding through water revenue certificates. The expansion of the water system improved public health conditions, Page 20 of 34 enhanced fire protection capabilities, and supported more consistent residential and commercial development. Collectively, these improvements reflect a broader period of post-World War II municipal investment in essential infrastructure systems. During this time, many small cities across Georgia were focused on modernizing utilities, improving transportation networks, and expanding public services to accommodate population growth and economic stability. While these contributions represent an important chapter in the development of Stockbridge, the available historical record indicates that Lee Street was already established prior to Mayor R. E. Lee’s tenure. Legal notices published in The Henry County Weekly in 1918 clearly reference Lee Street as an existing roadway within the Town of Stockbridge. This documented evidence places the existence of Lee Street at least several decades before the public service of both R. E. Lee and William Jackson “Dub” Lee. As such, from a historical and chronological standpoint, it is unlikely that the street was originally named in recognition of either individual. Additionally, early municipal records suggest that formal street naming processes were not consistently documented during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. As a result, many street names within the city likely developed organically based on land ownership patterns, local families, or commonly recognized geographic identifiers, rather than through formal legislative action. Taken together, while R. E. Lee and William Jackson “Dub” Lee played significant roles in advancing infrastructure and modernizing the City of Stockbridge during the mid-twentieth century, the available evidence indicates that Lee Street predates their tenure and was likely established during an earlier phase of the community’s development. Municipal Records and Mapping City Council minutes dated February 3, 1948 provide additional historical insight into the development of municipal recordkeeping within the City of Stockbridge. During this meeting, the Council discussed the absence of an official municipal map, and the minutes indicate that the City Clerk was instructed to contact the United States Census Bureau to advise that the City did not currently have a map but would provide one once available. From a planning and administrative perspective, this record is significant. The absence of a municipal map as late as 1948 suggests that the City’s early physical layout—including streets, parcels, and development patterns—had not yet been formally documented through standardized mapping practices. In many small municipalities during the early twentieth century, mapping and recordkeeping evolved gradually and were often secondary to immediate infrastructure and service needs. As a result, early street alignments and names were frequently established through informal or customary use rather than through formally adopted ordinances, plats, or official naming Page 21 of 34 resolutions. Streets often emerged along property boundaries, access routes, or paths of travel and became known by names associated with adjacent landowners, families, or local landmarks. Over time, these names became widely accepted and were incorporated into legal descriptions, deeds, and community usage without necessarily being recorded through formal municipal action. The lack of an official map also has implications for the preservation of historical records. Without a centralized mapping system or consistent documentation practices, it is less likely that early decisions regarding street naming were formally recorded or retained. This condition helps explain why a definitive municipal record identifying the origin of Lee Street has not been located. This context is particularly important when evaluating the historical origin of Lee Street. The absence of formal documentation should not be interpreted as evidence that the street lacked a clear origin, but rather as an indication that its naming likely occurred during a period when recordkeeping practices were limited or decentralized. Accordingly, the historical analysis relies on a combination of available sources—including newspaper publications, property records, cartographic evidence, and council minutes—to reconstruct the development of the street. This multi-source approach is consistent with standard practices in historical and planning research when primary municipal documentation is incomplete or unavailable. Taken together, the 1948 council minutes provide critical context for understanding why the specific origin of Lee Street cannot be definitively documented within City records, while also supporting the broader conclusion that the street likely developed organically as part of the community’s early growth pattern. Page 22 of 34 Figure 5: Minutes from the February 3, 1948 City Council meeting in Stockbridge showing R. E. Lee serving as mayor and documenting that the City Clerk was instructed to inform the U.S. Census Bureau that the town did not have an official municipal map. Page 23 of 34 Later Documentation of Lee Street Lee Street is further documented in a series of mid- to late-twentieth century planning maps, aerial imagery, and property-based reference materials, all of which confirm its continued presence, alignment, and functional role within the City of Stockbridge street network. One of the earliest such references appears on the 1962 Stockbridge Urban Area Zoning District Map (see Figure 6). This official planning document depicts Lee Street as part of the established urban framework of the city. Its inclusion indicates that by the early 1960s, Lee Street was not only physically present but also formally recognized within the City’s land use and regulatory structure. Zoning maps serve as foundational planning tools used to guide development patterns, designate land use districts, and regulate property development. The presence of Lee Street on this map demonstrates its integration into the City’s planned growth and municipal governance framework. Figure 6: 1962 Stockbridge Urban Area Zoning District Map (Lee Street highlighted) Page 24 of 34 Additional confirmation is provided through the 1978 Real Estate Atlas of Henry County, which includes both mapped roadway outlines and aerial imagery identifying Lee Street (see Figures 7 and 8). Real estate atlases are typically compiled using parcel data, ownership records, and roadway information, and are widely used for property identification, taxation, and land valuation purposes. The consistent depiction of Lee Street within these materials indicates that the roadway was well established and recognized across both public planning documents and private-sector mapping resources by the late twentieth century. Figure 7: 1978 Real Estate Atlas of Henry County – Aerial Imagery of Lee Street Page 25 of 34 Figure 8: 1978 Real Estate Atlas – Road Outline Map of Lee Street Page 26 of 34 Further supporting documentation is found in aerial imagery and parcel overlay maps from 2004 (see Figure 9 ), which illustrate the continued development and subdivision of land along Lee Street. These materials show that the roadway not only retained its original alignment but also became increasingly integrated into the surrounding residential and commercial fabric. Parcel overlays provide additional evidence of property ownership patterns and development intensity, reinforcing the role of Lee Street as a stable and functional component of the local street network. Figure 9: 2004 Realty Atlas of Henry County – Aerial Imagery with Parcel Overlay (Lee Street) From a planning perspective, the appearance of Lee Street across multiple decades of mapping and documentation is significant because it demonstrates both continuity and permanence within the City’s infrastructure system. By the mid- to late-twentieth century, Lee Street had transitioned from an informally established roadway—likely originating from early land use patterns and property boundaries—to a fixed and recognized component of the municipal transportation network. Importantly, these records also indicate that Lee Street has maintained its name, alignment, and general function over time, with no evidence of renaming or reclassification in the available historical documentation. This level of consistency suggests that the street name became firmly Page 27 of 34 embedded within the community and was consistently used across planning, mapping, and administrative platforms. When considered alongside earlier evidence—including 1918 legal notices referencing Lee Street as a boundary and early twentieth-century property records indicating development along the corridor—these later documents confirm that Lee Street has functioned as a longstanding and stable element of the City’s transportation and land use framework. Taken together, the 1962 zoning map, the 1978 real estate atlas, and the 2004 aerial and parcel mapping provide clear and consistent verification that Lee Street has been an enduring component of the City of Stockbridge for decades. These materials reinforce the conclusion that the street originated during an earlier phase of development and has remained continuously recognized and utilized within the community. Summary of Findings Based on a comprehensive review of available historical documentation, including newspaper archives, property records, draft registration records, and municipal history, the following findings are presented: • • • • • • Lee Street was established in the Town of Stockbridge by at least 1918, as evidenced by its appearance in contemporaneous legal notices published in The Henry County Weekly. These notices reference Lee Street as a defined boundary within property descriptions, indicating that the roadway was already recognized and in use at that time. The street name is consistently documented in early legal and property-related records, demonstrating that Lee Street functioned as an established and identifiable corridor within the community during the early twentieth century. The use of the street name in formal legal descriptions further confirms its significance within the town’s spatial framework. Members of the Lee family owned property in the immediate vicinity during this same period, including land referenced in early twentieth-century transactions and estate-related notices. This proximity establishes a clear geographic connection between the Lee family and the corridor along which Lee Street is located. Additional supporting documentation, including draft registration records and property ownership data, confirms the presence of individuals such as William Jackson Lee in Stockbridge during the early twentieth century, reinforcing the historical presence of the Lee family within the community at or near the time the street was established. The existence of Lee Street predates the mayoral service of R. E. Lee (late 1940s–early 1950s) and William Jackson “Dub” Lee (early 1960s), demonstrating that the street name was already in use several decades prior to their tenure in public office. This establishes a clear chronological distinction between the origin of the street name and later civic leadership associated with the Lee family. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was a common and welldocumented practice for streets—particularly in small towns and rural communities—to be informally named after adjacent landowners, prominent local families, or commonly recognized geographic features. In many cases, these names emerged organically over time Page 28 of 34 • • • based on local usage rather than through formal governmental action or recorded ordinances. In early communities such as Stockbridge, development patterns typically followed existing access routes, with homes, farms, and small commercial uses established along roadways that connected key destinations such as rail lines, churches, and town centers. As a result, streets often took on the names of the families whose land defined or bordered those corridors. Early municipal mapping, recordkeeping, and formal street-naming procedures were limited or inconsistently documented, particularly prior to the mid-twentieth century. As a result, no definitive legislative record has been identified that attributes the naming of Lee Street to a specific individual or official action. Taken together, the convergence of early documented use, geographic proximity of Lee family land ownership, and common historical naming practices supports the conclusion that Lee Street most likely derived its name from local land ownership patterns rather than from a later commemorative naming decision. Analysis The available historical and documentary evidence indicates that Lee Street most likely originated during the early development of the Town of Stockbridge, emerging as part of the community’s organic growth pattern in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. The consistent appearance of Lee Street in legal notices by 1918, combined with the documented presence of Lee family land ownership in the immediate vicinity, supports the conclusion that the street name is closely associated with local landholding patterns during this formative period. From a planning and historical development perspective, early communities such as Stockbridge did not typically follow formalized street naming procedures. Instead, roads and corridors often developed along property lines, travel routes, and connections between key destinations such as rail lines, churches, mills, and town centers. As these routes became more established, they were commonly identified by the names of adjacent landowners, prominent local families, or recognizable landmarks. This informal naming convention was widely observed throughout rural Georgia and similar small-town contexts during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The proximity of Lee family landholdings to the Lee Street corridor—documented through property records, census data, and legal notices referencing individuals such as Sallie Lee and Martin Parks Lee—provides a strong geographic and contextual basis for associating the street name with local family ownership. Additionally, the continuity of Lee family presence in the area across multiple decades further reinforces the likelihood that the name was derived from longstanding community recognition rather than a later formal designation. However, despite this strong circumstantial and contextual evidence, the precise origin of the name cannot be definitively verified. Early municipal records, including official maps, ordinances, and naming resolutions, were either not consistently created or have not been preserved. As a result, there is no surviving documentation that explicitly identifies the individual for whom Lee Street was named. Page 29 of 34 Accordingly, the historical record does not conclusively establish whether the street name was intended to commemorate a specific individual or simply reflect common local usage. Based on the available evidence, several plausible interpretations remain: • • • A local Lee family associated with adjacent land ownership, whose property defined or bordered the corridor that became Lee Street; A prominent individual bearing the surname Lee, whose identity may have been locally understood at the time but not formally recorded; or Another individual or reference that has not been preserved in existing records, due to gaps in early documentation and recordkeeping practices. It is also important to note that, although later civic leaders such as R. E. Lee and William Jackson “Dub” Lee played significant roles in the development of Stockbridge during the mid-twentieth century, the documented existence of Lee Street prior to 1918 establishes that the street name predates their public service. Therefore, it is unlikely that the street was originally named in recognition of their tenure. In summary, while the available evidence strongly supports an origin tied to early land ownership and community development patterns, the absence of definitive documentation prevents a conclusive identification of the specific individual for whom Lee Street was named. Proposed Action The City Council is requested to consider adoption of a resolution to rename North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. If approved, the proposed name change would recognize the legacy and historical significance of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose leadership in the Civil Rights Movement represents a defining chapter in American history. The renaming would serve as a commemorative action that aligns with broader national and local efforts to honor Dr. King’s contributions to civil rights, equality, and social justice. From a community and planning perspective, the designation of a major roadway as Martin Luther King, Jr. Way would establish a unified corridor identity that reflects the values, cultural heritage, and historical awareness of the City of Stockbridge. Such designations are commonly used in municipalities across the United States to recognize significant historical figures while also reinforcing civic identity and community pride. The proposed renaming would also provide an opportunity to enhance wayfinding, placemaking, and community recognition along the corridor. As a continuous north-south route, the consolidation of North and South Lee Street under a single commemorative name would create a more cohesive identity and improve clarity for residents, visitors, and emergency services. If approved, implementation of the name change would require coordination across multiple departments and agencies, including: Page 30 of 34 • • • • • Updating official City records, maps, and GIS databases to reflect the new street name; Coordination with Henry County, the United States Postal Service, and emergency service providers to ensure continuity of addressing and response systems; Notification of affected property owners and businesses, including guidance regarding address updates and transition timelines; Replacement and installation of street signage, including potential gateway or commemorative signage along the corridor; and Public communication and outreach, to ensure a clear and coordinated transition process. Consideration of this proposed action involves both historical context and community values, as it balances the documented origins of the existing street name with the opportunity to recognize a nationally significant figure whose legacy continues to shape communities today. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council review the historical findings and analysis presented in this report and provide policy direction regarding the proposed renaming of North Lee Street and South Lee Street. The historical research indicates that Lee Street originated during the early development of the Town of Stockbridge and was likely associated with local land ownership patterns rather than a formally documented naming action. While the exact individual for whom the street was named cannot be definitively identified, the evidence demonstrates that the street name predates later civic leaders associated with the Lee family. Given this context, the proposed renaming represents a policy decision rather than a correction of the historical record. As such, the City Council may consider whether the proposed name change aligns with the City’s goals related to community identity, historical recognition, and cultural significance. Should the City Council determine that the renaming is appropriate, staff recommends approval of a resolution to rename North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, along with direction to proceed with implementation, including coordination with relevant agencies, notification of affected property owners, and updates to official City records and mapping systems. . Page 31 of 34 Historical Timeline Concord Methodist Church established Civil War activity in Stockbridge 1863 1826 Johnson’s Georgia and Alabama Map (A.J. Johnson); Stockbridge identified as a recognized settlement Page 32 of 34 The Henry County Weekly publishes notice of estate sale for Samuel Lee, referencing Lee’s Mill in the 12th Land District 1865 1864 Lindenkohl Map (U.S. Government) (Stockbridge shown within regional transportation network) Southern Railroad constructed 1880 1879 1895 1881–1882 U.S. Census documents Samuel Lee household (Robert E. Lee listed as a child) Stockbridge incorporated as a town Historical Timeline (cont.) Early residence established along Lee Street, confirming corridor development Stockbridge Baptist Church established 1910 ~1900 Stockbridge not listed as separate municipality (Census); Reflects preincorporation rural status Page 33 of 34 Stockbridge incorporated as a city; Population ~386 residents (U.S. Census) 1918 1917 Population ~392 residents (Henry County District 775) 1927 1920 Lee Street documented in legal notices; Established roadway used in property descriptions Robert E. Lee begins service as Mayor 1939 1930 Henry County Highway Planning Map; Population ~443 residents; Development centered on transportation routes Historical Timeline (cont.) U.S. Census confirms continued residency of Robert E. Lee William Jackson “Dub” Lee serves as Mayor 1952 ~1950 Death of R.E.Lee Page 34 of 34 1962 1958–1960s Stockbridge Urban Area Zoning District Map (Lee Street formally recognized in zoning framework) City-Paid Basic Life Insurance Change Request DWAYNE POLLOCK, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR Proposal: Increase City-Paid Basic Life & AD&D Insurance Recommend increasing the Basic Life/AD&D benefit from $10,000 to $50,000 for all FT employees, including elected officials (no minimum benefit amount). Purpose of the Proposal - EPAS Enhance Enhance the City’s employee benefits package Provide Align Provide meaningful financial protection to employees and their families Align benefits with common public-sector employer practices Strengthen Strengthen recruitment and retention of quality employees 3 Benefit Structure PROPOSED CURRENT • • • • • 4 Basic Life and AD&D coverage currently provided: $10,000 per employee Coverage applies to all FT employees Carrier: Lincoln Financial Group Current rate: $0.216 per $1,000 of coverage Average monthly cost per employee: $2.65 • • • • • Increase Basic Life/AD&D coverage to $50,000 Coverage applies to all FT employees and elected officials No minimum benefit amount Coverage remains with Lincoln Financial Group Average monthly cost per employee: $11.20 • Current total insured volume: $1,801,800 Financial Overview • Proposed insured volume: $9,132,500 • Average monthly cost per employee increases from $2.65 to $11.20 • Total annual cost increase to the City: $19,009 Demonstrates commitment to employee wellbeing Strategic Value to the City Provides stronger financial protection for employees and their families Improves competitiveness with peer municipalities Supports the City’s ability to attract and retain talent Recommendation Motion: Authorize the increase of the City of Stockbridge’s Basic Life and AD&D benefit from $10,000 to $50,000 effective April 1, 2026. Funding source: Employee Group Life Insurance 7 Any Questions? Thank you for your consideration. City-Paid Basic Life Insurance Change Request DWAYNE POLLOCK, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR Proposal: Increase City-Paid Basic Life & AD&D Insurance Recommend increasing the Basic Life/AD&D benefit from $10,000 to $50,000 for all FT employees, including elected officials (no minimum benefit amount). Purpose of the Proposal - EPAS Enhance Enhance the City’s employee benefits package Provide Align Provide meaningful financial protection to employees and their families Align benefits with common public-sector employer practices Strengthen Strengthen recruitment and retention of quality employees 3 Benefit Structure PROPOSED CURRENT • • • • • 4 Basic Life and AD&D coverage currently provided: $10,000 per employee Coverage applies to all FT employees Carrier: Lincoln Financial Group Current rate: $0.216 per $1,000 of coverage Average monthly cost per employee: $2.65 • • • • • Increase Basic Life/AD&D coverage to $50,000 Coverage applies to all FT employees and elected officials No minimum benefit amount Coverage remains with Lincoln Financial Group Average monthly cost per employee: $11.20 • Current total insured volume: $1,801,800 Financial Overview • Proposed insured volume: $9,132,500 • Average monthly cost per employee increases from $2.65 to $11.20 • Total annual cost increase to the City: $19,009 Demonstrates commitment to employee wellbeing Strategic Value to the City Provides stronger financial protection for employees and their families Improves competitiveness with peer municipalities Supports the City’s ability to attract and retain talent Recommendation Motion: Authorize the increase of the City of Stockbridge’s Basic Life and AD&D benefit from $10,000 to $50,000 effective April 1, 2026. Any Questions? Thank you for your consideration. Funding source: Employee Group Life Insurance 7 SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE AND RIVERSIDE TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, LLC. This Service Agreement ("Agreement”) is made and entered into by The City of Stockbridge ("City"), a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, and Riverside Traffic Solutions, LLC ("Contractor"), a domestic limited liability company, with a principal office address of 18473 US Hwy 27, Roopville, GA 30170, collectively the "Parties." NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, City and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services Contractor shall commence, diligently pursue, and complete the services designated under "Traffic Signal Repair and Maintenance Services" (the "Services") in the attached Exhibit A – Macon-Bibb County RFP No. 24-022-LH, Traffic Signal Repair and Maintenance Services, issued April 5, 2024, which is incorporated herein by reference. Contractor shall perform regular and ordinary preventive maintenance once per quarter, respond onsite to non-emergency requests for service within 24 hours on a 24-7, as needed basis, and respond on-site to emergency service calls within a 2-hour or 4-hour window, depending on the severity of the emergency as determined by the Public Works Director, or his designee. Contractor shall designate primary and secondary points of contact for emergency and after-hours service requests and provide direct contact information for such points of contact to the Public Works Director, or his or her designee. All Services shall be performed in accordance with all Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and ordinances. Contractor warrants that it has or will obtain and will maintain all certifications, licenses, and permits necessary to provide the Services to the City. Contractor warrants that it and its principals, employees, agents, and any subcontractors hired or contracted to complete work described herein have the skills and technical training to complete the Services in a workman-like manner and in accordance with current industry standards, Contractor shall not be obligated to perform any services beyond those contemplated by this Agreement. Any changes to the Scope of Services shall be mutually agreed upon and made in writing, signed by both Parties hereto. 2. Compensation Contractor shall be compensated for work done in accordance with the attached Exhibit B - Contractor’s Traffic Signal Services Cost Proposals ("Exhibit B"), attached hereto and incorporated by reference. For the purposes of this Agreement, the use of the acronym "BU" shall refer to the use of a Bucket Truck, and the use of the acronym "PU" shall refer to the use of a Pickup Truck in the performance of services hereunder. All materials utilized in the performance of Services at any City-owned facility may be invoiced to City at a TWENTY -FIVE (25%) percent mark-up over Contractor's cost in obtaining the materials. City will not pay any interest, penalties, or other amount claimed beyond the amount authorized by this Agreement. Any amount charged to City in excess of the amount stated in this Agreement must be approved by City in writing in the form of a Change Order prior to performance of services. Payment of all amounts due is to be made upon presentation of an invoice and will be considered past due thirty (30) days from City's receipt of invoice. City is tax exempt and cannot agree to pay State or Federal taxes. Prior to the issuance of final payment from City, Contractor shall certify in a form satisfactory to City that all subcontractors, staff, materialmen, suppliers, and other persons engaged by Contractor in connection to this Agreement have been paid in full or will be paid in full utilizing the funds constituting final payment to Contractor. 3. Term This Agreement shall be effective as of the date fully executed and shall remain in effect through December 31, 2026. Upon mutual written consent of the Parties, this Agreement may be renewed for up to four (4) additional one-year terms, not to extend beyond June 30, 2029. In no event shall this Agreement extend beyond the expiration of the originating MaconBibb County contract, including any valid renewals thereof. 4. Termination Either Party may terminate this Agreement, or any part of this Agreement, upon thirty (30) days written notice, with or without cause, and with no penalty or additional cost beyond the rates stated in this Agreement. In the event of such termination, Contractor shall be entitled to receive payment for work completed up to and including the date of termination. 5. Fiscal Non-Appropriation Clause Financial obligations of City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted, and otherwise made available in accordance with the rules, regulations, and resolutions of City, and other applicable laws. In the event that there ceases to be appropriated funds available to pay any obligation under this Agreement, this Agreement shall be terminated. 6. Performance Standards Contractor shall perform the Services using that degree of care, skill, and professionalism ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by members of the same profession practicing or performing the substantially same or similar services. Contractor warrants that all of Contractor's employees, agents, and subcontractors have all necessary skills, training, certifications, and expertise to complete the work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Contractor further warrants that work will be completed in accordance with Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) regulations, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulations, and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 7. Independent Contractor Contractor is an independent Contractor and not an agent, partner, joint venture, or employee of City. Neither Contractor, nor any employee or agent thereof, shall be deemed for any reason to be an employee or agent of City. City shall not have any liability or responsibility for any direct payments of any salaries, wages, payroll taxes, or any and all other forms or types of compensation or benefits to any personnel performing services for City under this Agreement. Contractor will be responsible for, and compensation paid under this Agreement shall include the cost of obtaining, maintaining, and complying with, and paying all fees and taxes associated with all applicable licenses, authorizations, consents, approvals, and permits required of Contractor in performing services and complying with this Agreement. Contractor will not make any representations, warranties, or commitments binding the City without the City's written consent. The compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be the sole payment for services rendered. Contractor shall provide City with a W-9 form for each contract term for which services are performed. Contractor and City agree that Contractor will be free to contract for similar services to be performed for other employers while under Contract with City. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that Contractor is not entitled to receive Unemployment Insurance Benefits or Worker's Compensation Coverage. Further, Contractor is obligated to pay Federal and State Income Tax on any moneys received from City for services provided under this Agreement. 8. Subcontracting and Assignment Contractor shall not assign or subcontract the whole or any part of this Agreement without City's prior written consent. Should Contractor subcontract any services, Contractor shall remain responsible for the performance of the subcontractors, remain City's sole point of contact for the services, and be responsible for the payment of any subcontractors. Subject to the foregoing, the terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of either party. Notwithstanding the terms of any subcontractor's agreement, in no circumstances shall any subcontractor have any greater rights as against the City than the Contractor has under this Agreement; and in no circumstances shall the City's responsibilities towards subcontractor be greater than City's responsibilities to Contractor under this Agreement. 9. Conflicts of Interest Contractor and all subcontractors thereof shall immediately notify City in writing, specifically disclosing any and all potential or actual conflicts of interest, which arise or may arise during the execution of its work in the fulfillment of the requirements of this Agreement. City shall make a written determination as to whether a conflict of interest actually exists and the actions to be taken to resolve the conflict of interest. Failure to properly disclose any conflicts of interest may result in immediate termination of this Agreement. Upon termination, Contractor shall be entitled to compensation of services performed prior to the date of termination, on a pro rata basis, provided such services are reasonably satisfactory to the City. 10. Indemnification To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and volunteers, and others working on behalf of City, from and against any and all third-party claims, demands, suits, costs (including reasonable legal costs), expenses, and liabilities ("Claims") alleging personal injury, including bodily injury or death, and/or property damage, but only to the extent that any such Claims are caused by the negligence of Contractor or any Officer, employee, representative, or agent of Contractor. Contractor shall have no obligations under this Section to the extent that any Claim arises as a result of Contractor's compliance with City law, ordinances, rules, regulations, resolution, executive orders, or other instructions received from City. 11. Insurance (a) Contractor shall procure and maintain and shall cause any subcontractor of Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below throughout the term of this Agreement. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurers acceptable to City. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (b) Contractor shall procure and maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount not less than that statutory minimum as established by the General Assembly of the State of Georgia. Contractor shall require all Trade Contractors /Subcontractors performing work under this Agreement to obtain an insurance certificate showing proof of Worker's Compensation coverage. (c) Contractor agrees to procure and maintain General Commercial Liability Insurance (2001 ISO Occurrence Form or Equivalent) with minimum combined single limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) general aggregate per Project, covering all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage, personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, Independent Contractors, products and completed operations, explosion and/or collapse of building, and underground damage. The policy shall contain a severability of interest provision and shall be endorsed to include City and City's officers, employees, and contractors as additional insureds. A company authorized to conduct business in the State of Georgia must issue this policy. Excess liability coverage may be used in combination with the base policy to obtain the required limits. (d) Contractor agrees to procure and maintain Business Automobile Liability Insurance ("BAP") with liability limits of not less than $1,000,000.00, covering any owned, non-owned, or hired motor vehicles. Excess liability coverage may be used in combination with the base policy to obtain these limits. This policy shall name the City and its officers and employees as additional insured. (e) Prior to the commencement of Services, Contractor shall submit certificates of insurance acceptable to City. Each insurance policy required above shall be issued by a company licensed by the Insurance Commissioner of the State of Georgia to transact the business of insurance in the State of Georgia for the applicable line of insurance and, except otherwise stated in this Agreement, shall be an insurer with a Best Policyholders Rating of "A" or better and with a financial size rating of Class V or larger. One original certificate of insurance with all endorsements attached must be deposited with City for each insurance policy required. Contractor is responsible for any delay resulting from the failure of its insurance carriers to furnish proof of proper coverage in the prescribed form. (f) All deductibles shall be paid by Contractor. All liability policies obtained by Contractor in satisfaction of this Agreement shall be primary and noncontributory, shall list the City of Stockbridge and all elected officials, officers, agents, and employees thereof as additional insureds, and all such policies shall apply separately to each insured against whom any claim is made, or suit is brought, except with respect to limits of insurance provided. All coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf' basis, with defense costs paid in addition to policy limits and there shall be no cross liability performed by Contractor. Contractor shall provide current certificates of insurance for all insurance types required under this Agreement and shall provide updated certificates of insurance no later than thirty (30) days prior to the renewal or amendment of any required insurance policy. Contractor shall provide complete copies of any or all insurance policies upon written demand. No policy shall be cancelled, non-renewed, or have policy limits reduced outside of this Agreement unless City is given thirty (30) days advance notice from Contractor. Contractor shall further require that no insurer shall cancel, non-renew, or reduce the policy limits of any policy required under this Agreement without first giving thirty (30) days written notice to City. (g) The City shall be under no obligation to ensure that Contractor, or any subcontractor, complies with the insurance requirements of this Agreement, and Contractor assumes all liability arising from its, or its subcontractor's failure, to acquire and/or maintain adequate insurance to cover its operations and business. Contractor further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City for any claims arising from Contractor's, or any subcontractor's, failure to acquire and/or maintain adequate insurance. Contractor shall be solely responsible for any delay resulting from the failure of his insurance carriers to furnish proof of proper coverage in the above-described forms. 12. Confidential Information and Open Records The Parties acknowledge that both Contractor and City are required to comply with the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-70, et seq. See, Milliron v. Antonakakis, S24G0198, Supreme Court of Georgia, decided August 13, 2024. As a result, Contractor acknowledges and agrees that City may make such disclosures as are authorized or required under the Georgia Open Records Act, notwithstanding any claims of confidentiality asserted by Contractor as to any records or data in the City's possession. Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall designate in writing that one or more of its officers shall be the open records officer for Contractor in accordance with the Open Records Act. In the event that Contractor receives a request for records under the Open Records Act, Contractor shall notify City within two business days by sending an email, return receipt requested, to cityclerk@cityofstockbridgega.gov. Contractor shall provide City with copies of all records proposed for production prior to responding to such request. Contractor shall assert all exemptions and exceptions available to the fullest extent of the law and shall not produce any records which are subject to withholding under the Open Records Act or any other state or federal law. Contractor shall have a duty to consult with independent legal counsel concerning which records are or are not subject to production prior to making any production, and shall certify to City at the time the proposed production is provided to City that the records contained therein have been reviewed by counsel for responsiveness and that all information that is protected or protectable from release under the law has been redacted therefrom. Contractor shall be responsible for calculating response costs and billing requestors for all requests sent in accordance with the Open Records Act, and Contractor's complete compliance with the provisions of this section shall be performed at no cost to City. Contractor assumes all civil and criminal liability for its own compliance with the Open Records Act. In the event that Contractor produces material records that are subject to withholding under the Open Records Act, and it would be impossible or very difficult to accurately estimate the damages and harm caused to City by such production, then 6 Contractor shall pay City the sum of$10,000.00 per request as liquidated damages. The Parties intend that these liquidated damages shall constitute compensation, and not a penalty, and that the liquidated damages are a reasonable estimate of the anticipated or actual harm that might arise from a breach by Contractor. Where actual damages are calculable, then City shall reserve the right to seek actual damages for the harm caused by such production instead of liquidated damages. Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting in any way the City's right to seek injunctive, declaratory, or other relief to prevent the release of protected information prior to any such production being made. 13. Audit Clause City or its authorized agent shall have the right to audit and inspect financial records pertaining to services offered under this Agreement from time to time during the contract term, upon reasonable notice to Contractor and during Contractor's ordinary business hours. 14. Publicity Contractor shall not release without prior written approval from City, any publicity regarding services provided, including but not limited to, notices, information pamphlets, press releases, research, reports, signs and similar public notices prepared by or for Contractor, identifying City as receiving goods or services under this Agreement. 15. Discrimination and ADA Compliance Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, national origin, or any other category protected by applicable federal or state law. Such action shall include but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notice to be provided by an agency of the federal government, setting forth the provisions of Equal Opportunity laws. Contractor shall comply with the appropriate provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA"), as enacted and as from time to time amended, and any other applicable federal regulations. A signed certificate confirming compliance with the ADA may be requested by City at any time during the term of this Agreement. 16. Drug Free Workplace Contractor and any subcontractors shall not be in possession of or use a controlled substance or marijuana during the performance of this Agreement, except for those controlled substances prescribed by a licensed medical provider. City has a no tolerance policy for violation of this rule. 17. Prohibition Against Employing Illegal Aliens 7 Contractor is registered with and is authorized to use and uses the federal work authorization program commonly known as E-Verify. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement and will verify immigration status to confirm employment eligibility. Contractor shall not enter into an agreement with a subcontractor that fails to certify to Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement. Contractor is prohibited from using the E-Verify program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while this Agreement is being performed. 18. Notices All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing (the "Notice") and deemed given when (a) hand delivered by the sender and properly receipted for by a responsible person of the receiving party, (b) deposited in the United States Mail, properly addressed, with sufficient postage affixed, via first class mail, return receipt requested, (c) via Federal Express, UPS or similar national overnight courier service with delivery charges prepaid; or (d) via facsimile with a copy sent that same day via (a), (b), or (c). All Notices shall be addressed as follows: For City: City of Stockbridge Attn: City Manager 4640 North Henry Blvd Stockbridge, GA 30281 For Contractor: Riverside Traffic Solutions, LLC Attn: Brandon Oravetz 18473 US Hwy27 Roopville, GA30170 Either party has the right to designate in writing, as provided above, a different address to which any notice, demand or communication is to be mailed. 19. Force Majeure Any delay or non-performance of any provision of this Agreement by either Party (with the exception of payment obligations) which is caused by events beyond the reasonable control of such party, shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement, and the time for performance of such provision, if any, shall be deemed to be extended for a period equal to the duration of the conditions preventing such performance. 20. Dispute Resolution and Jury Trial In the event a dispute arises out of or relates to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, and if said dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, Parties may try in good faith to settle the dispute by mediation before resorting to some other dispute resolution procedure or litigation; however, mediation is not a required pre-condition to litigation. Disputes arising under this Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Georgia. Exclusive jurisdiction and venue for any legal proceeding related to this Agreement shall lie in Henry County, Georgia or the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. City does not agree to arbitration nor waive its right to a jury trial. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as waiving any immunity held by the City under the Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the event of dispute resolution or litigation to enforce any of the terms herein, each Party shall pay all its own costs and attorney's fees. 21. Non-Exclusivity. Nothing herein shall prevent or be construed as preventing City from utilizing its own personnel or a third-party Vendor to complete any work that may or may not fall under the scope of work herein contemplated. No set amounts of work are guaranteed by this agreement or any provision herein. The Parties hereto agree and acknowledge that each has their own separate business interests and that each is permitted to engage with in the same or similar work as contemplated herein. 22. Authority to Execute The person or persons executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they are fully authorized to sign and so execute this Agreement and to bind their respective entities to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 23. Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement shall be fully executed when each Party whose signature is required has signed at least one counterpart, even though no one counterpart contains all of the signatures of all the Parties to this Agreement. Reproduced or electronic signatures shall be considered the same as an original signature. Delivery of a copy of this Agreement bearing an original signature by facsimile transmission, by electronic mail or by any other electronic means will have the same effect as physical delivery of the paper document bearing the original signature. 24. Electronic Representations and Records Parties hereby agree to regard electronic representations of original signatures as legally sufficient for executing this Agreement and scanned signatures emailed by PDF or otherwise shall be as valid as the original. Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic document, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. 25. Waiver Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of that provision. Waiver of any right or power arising out of this Agreement shall not be deemed waiver of any other right or power. 26. Severability In the event that any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid, unenforceable, or unlawful, such provision shall be deemed omitted and shall not affect the validity of other provisions of this Agreement. 27. Survival Any provision of this Agreement which contemplates performance or observance subsequent to any termination or expiration of this Agreement or which must survive in order to give effect to its meaning, shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 28. Entire Agreement The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement sets forth the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties and fully supersedes all previous communications, representations or agreements, oral or written, between the Parties pertaining to the same subject matter. This Agreement may only be amended or modified in writing by consent of both Parties. Contractor may not unilaterally amend or modify this Agreement by including provisions in its invoices, or other business forms, which shall be deemed objected to by City and of no force or effect. This Agreement is executed pursuant to the City’s authority to utilize cooperative and piggyback contracts under applicable Georgia law IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement to be effective as of the date executed by both parties. By: Date Attested: RIVERSIDE TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, LLC: By: Date (Name/Title) Attested: Date (SEAL) Q:\At1y\AEB\Contracts\FY 2025 Contracts\2024-022 - 1,-affic Signal Services - Riverside Traffic Solutions Inc - FM.doc EXHIBIT A III. SCOPE OF SERVICES. 1. Preventive Maintenance (quarterly) 2. Troubleshooting and repairing signal malfunctions 3. Repair damaged, destroyed, broken, etc. signal, poles, cabinets and all other items in signal systems, flashers, school flashers, RFBs, HA WK systems, etc. 4. All types of vehicle detection repair/replacement as needed. 5. All work shall comply with GDOT, MUTCD, and NHTSA standards and specs. 6. Provide References 7. Number of Employees to perform duties Traffic Signs: Installation, Maintenance and Repair of all Stockbridge owned traffic signs on Citymaintained roadways and properties 2. Installation, Maintenance and Repair of all types of traffic calming devices/signs on City-maintained roadways. 3. All work shall comply with GDOT, MUTCD, and NHTSA standards and specs. 1. General Contractors Requirements 1. The Contractor shall provide routine scheduled preventative maintenance/operation services to all locations during the hours of operations. Preventative maintenance tasks shall include, but not limited to, furnishing all equipment, materials, and labor necessary to perform assigned activities described in this Scope of Work. 2. The Contractor shall provide an assigned manager/supervisor for the City of Stockbridge Public Works Department to ensure services are delivered consistent with the scope of services described herein. Management services shall include supervising, evaluating service delivery methods, and submitting improvements/enhancement opportunities to improve quality. 3. Contractor shall provide monthly, quarterly, and year-to-date operational reporting services that highlight operational issues/conditions and summarize the preventive maintenance, remedial work requests and facility management. In addition, Contractor shall prepare an invoice listing the expenses to be paid and submit each invoice to The City of Stockbridge Public Works Department for payment in a lump sum. 4. For on-call Services, the Contractor shall perform emergency services on an "as-needed basis" for maintenance services. If an emergency arises, City designated personnel may contact the contractors on the City's on-call emergency services list to obtain contractor's availability. Upon notification by the City of the scope of a given project, Contractor shall later follow up with an invoice for on-call emergency service that shall consist of a narrative description of the task assigned, detailed scope of work to complete the task and cost for completion and any supporting information for work performed. The City reserves the right to request supporting documentation for the contractor's original cost on parts and materials. All invoices for on-call emergency and non-emergency services must include a breakdown of the number of hours for all fixed rates charged and the original cost and markup price for all parts and materials charged. 5. The Contractor shall provide on-call emergency and non-emergency repairs on a time and material basis. 6. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, and all code regulation, and safety regulations recommendations in relation to all work accomplished. 7. As an agent of Stockbridge Facilities Management permits will not be required for routine maintenance. For larger projects and new construction applicable permits are required with no permitting fee. MACON-BIBB COUNTY, GEORGIA Request for Proposals (RFP) FOR Traffic Signal Repair and Maintenance Services 24-022-LH 95890 96877 MACON-BIBB COUNTY ISSUE DATE: 4/5/24 DUE DATE: 5/16/24 MBE/WBE/DBE Participation: Minority, Women Owned, and other Disadvantaged Business Enterprises are encouraged to participate in the solicitation process. Additionally, respondents are encouraged to use M/W/DBE sub-consultants where possible. Small and other disadvantaged businesses requiring assistance with the competitive process can contact Cherise Stephens, Small Business Affairs at (478) 300-2297 or cstephens@maconbibb.us 1 1. GENERAL A. Invitation Notice is hereby given that Macon-Bibb County will receive responses to the Request for Professional Services (original plus 3 copies and Flash Drive) in the Procurement Department, 700 Poplar Street, Suite 308, Macon, Georgia 31201, until 12:00 o’clock NOON at the time legally prevailing in Macon, Georgia on Thursday, May 16, 2024, for Traffic Signal Repair and Maintenance Services for Macon- Bibb County. NO LATE RESPONSES WILL BE CONSIDERED The names of responding firms will be publicly read on Thursday, May 16, 2024, at 2:00 P.M. in the MaconBibb County Procurement Department Conference Room, located at 700 Poplar Street, Suite 308, Macon, Ga 31201. The deadline to submit questions is Friday, April 26, 2024, by 3:00 p.m. Questions must be emailed to lhardwick@maconbibb.us B. Definitions Wherever the term “Owner”, “County”, or “Macon-Bibb County” occur in this document, it shall mean MaconBibb County, a political subdivision of the State of Georgia acting through the Macon-Bibb County Board of Commissioners. C. Solicitation Documents Announcement of this Request for Professional Services may also be posted on the Macon-Bibb County website at www.maconbibb.us/purchasing and on the Georgia Procurement Registry website https://ssl.doas.state.ga.us/PRSapp/PR_index.jsp D. Insurance Requirements Insurance coverage shall be carried with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Georgia. All coverage should be written with insurance company with a Best Rating of A or better. Insurance shall be obtained prior to commencement of work and shall remain in force throughout the period of the contract. Macon-Bibb County shall be named as additional insured on the policy. Workers’ Compensation: Statutory Errors and Omission: $1,000,000 General Liability: $1,000,000 E. Submittals Responses must be sealed and identified on the outside of the package as and delivered to 24-022-LH, Traffic Signal Maintenance Services Facilities Maintenance Services for Macon-Bibb County Macon-Bibb County Procurement Department 700 Poplar Street Suite 308 Macon, Georgia 31201 Telephone: (478) 803-0550 Submissions may not be withdrawn for a period of one hundred and twenty (120) days after the deadline on date of closing. Macon- Bibb reserves the right to reject any and all submissions and to waive technicalities and 2 formalities. Respondents shall carefully read the information contained herein and submit a complete response to all requirements and questions as directed. Submittals and any other information submitted by in response to the RFP shall become the property of Macon-Bibb County. F. Responsiveness In order to be considered “responsive” the submission must include completed copies of the following documents: • Price Proposal Form • Proposer Qualification Form • List of Sub-Consultants • Minority Participation Goal • Financial & Legal Stability Statement • Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act (E-Verify) Affidavit G. Responsibility In order to be considered “responsible” the submitting firm must meet the following minimum qualifications: • Three (3) years of experience providing the services included herein • Licensed to do business in the State of Georgia • Financially and legally responsible to perform the services included herein H. Reservations Macon-Bibb County will not provide compensation to Respondents for any expenses incurred by the Respondent(s) for submittal preparation or for any demonstrations that may be made, unless otherwise expressly stated or required by law. Each submission should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward, concise description of your firm’s ability to meet the requirements of this RFP. Emphasis should be on completeness, clarity of content, responsiveness to the requirements, and an understanding of the Owner’s needs. Macon-Bibb County makes no guarantee that an award will be made as a result of this RFP and reserves the right to accept or reject any or all submittals, with or without cause, waive any formalities or minor technical inconsistencies, or delete any item/requirement from this RFP or contract when deemed to be in the Owner’s best interest. Macon-Bibb County will consider only representations made within the submission in response to this RFP. Owner will not be bound to act by any previous knowledge, communication, or submission by the firms other than this RFP. Failure to comply with the requirements contained herein may result in the submission being deemed “nonresponsive” or “non-responsible”. Nonresponsive submissions will not be reviewed for potential award. II. BACKGROUND Macon Bibb County government has a legislative branch which composes of ten Commissioners and employs approximately 1,708 individuals. The County provides a variety of services, that include facility maintenance, public works, engineering services, building and fire safety, and a host of other essential services to maintain the development of the community and the County’s infrastructure. 3 III. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Macon-Bibb County Facility Maintenance Department is soliciting requests for proposals from highly skilled contractors to perform traffic signal repair and maintenance services. The Contractors must be certified in his/her trade and licensed in the State of Georgia. The services required include both preventive maintenance, routine maintenance, and on-call emergency repairs. The Scope of Work for this Request for Proposal will include the following services to provide all equipment, materials, (Macon Bibb reserves the option to purchase and provide equipment and materials on a situational case by case basis) and labor required to perform the listed services: Traffic Signal: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Traffic Signs: 1. 2. 3. Preventive Maintenance (quarterly) Troubleshooting and repairing signal malfunctions Repair damaged, destroyed, broken, etc. signal, poles, cabinets and all other items in signal systems, flashers, school flashers, RFBs, HAWK systems, etc. All types of vehicle detection repair/replacement as needed. All work to GDOT, MUTCD, and NHSA standards and specs. Provide References Provide examples of Signal work preformed in Macon-Bibb Area Number of Employees to perform duties. Are you approved Vendor for Macon-Bibb Installation, Maintenance and Repair of all MBC owned traffic signs on countymaintained roadways and properties Installation, Maintenance and Repair of all types of traffic calming devices/signs on county-maintained roadways. All work to GDOT, MUTCD, and NHSA standards and specs. General Contractors Requirements 1. The Contractor shall provide routine scheduled preventative maintenance/operation services to all locations in Macon-Bibb County government facilities during the hours of operations. Preventative maintenance tasks shall include, but not limited to, furnishing all equipment, materials, and labor necessary to perform assigned activities described in this Scope of Work. 2. The Contractor shall provide an assigned manager/supervisor for Macon-Bibb County to ensure services are delivered consistent with the scope of services described herein. Management services shall include supervising, evaluating service delivery methods, and submitting improvements/enhancement opportunities to improve quality. 3. Contractor shall provide monthly, quarterly, and year to-date operational reporting services that highlight operational issues/conditions and summarize the preventive maintenance, remedial work requests and facility management. In addition, Contractor shall prepare an invoice listing the expenses to be paid and submit each invoice to Macon-Bibb County Government for payment in a lump sum. 4. For on-call Services, the Contractor shall perform emergency services on an “as-needed basis” for maintenance services. If an emergency arises, Macon-Bibb County designated personnel may contact the contractors on the County’s on-call emergency services list to obtain contractor’s availability. Upon notification by the County of the scope of a given project, Contractor shall later follow-up with an invoice for on-call emergency service that shall consist of a narrative description of the task assigned, detailed scope of work to complete the task and cost for completion and any supporting information for work performed. The County reserves the right to request supporting documentation for the contractor’s original cost on parts and materials. All invoices for on-call emergency and non-emergency services must include a 4 breakdown of the number of hours for all fixed rates charged and the original cost and mark up price for all parts and materials charged. 5. The Contractor shall provide on-call emergency and non-emergency repairs on a time and material basis. 6.The Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, and all code regulation, and safety regulations recommendations in relation to all work accomplished. 7.As an agent of Macon Bibb Facilities Management permits will not be required for routine maintenance. For larger projects and new construction applicable permits are required with no permitting fee. 5 The successful contractors Key Dates: • RFP Release Date: 4/5/2024 • Questions Due: 4/26/2024 • Proposal Due Date: 5/16/2024 IV. SUBMITTAL FORMAT AND REQUIREMENTS Along with the included required submittal documents, bidders shall provide the following: • • • A Statement of Qualifications on the company’s history with similar project A cost proposal A timeline for completion. Proposals shall be submitted by mail or hand delivery by 12:00 noon on May 16th, 2024. The address for submittals is: Macon-Bibb County Procurement Department 700 Poplar Street Suite 308 Macon, Georgia 31201 Questions: Any questions regarding this RFP shall be submitted to Laura Hardwick, Procurement Director in via email at Lhardwick@maconbibb.us. All questions will be aggregated, and answers shared with all interested bidders via addendum Letter of Interest: V. SCORING (total possible number of points = 100) Expérience/Qualifications – Maximum 40 points Capacity /Resources - 40 Points Price – Maximum 15 Points Local Approach – Maximum 5 Points VI. AWARD BASIS Award will be recommended to the respondent with the highest number of points. 6 TRAFFIC SIGNAL COST PROPOSAL DO YOU PROVIDE 24 HOURS, 7 DAYS PER WEEK SERVICE ______YES______NO Labor Rates – Per Hour Enter Hourly Rates for labor services used in performing all work which may be required. Labor rates shall be paid on the basis of Time on the Job Site. Labor rates shall include all direct and indirect costs such as transportation, G&A, contractor supervision, and profit, etc. Labor Rate - Regular time – 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday - Friday 1. Annual Preventative Maintenance 2. On-Call Hourly Labor Rate (24-hour response) Annual $ $725.00 per signal HR $ $135.00 Tech + PU $195.00 Tech + BU Labor Rate - Overtime 5:30 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., Mon. - Fri., Weekends & Holidays 1 On-Call Hourly Labor Rate, Overtime (24-hour response) HR Emergency Service Rate charge for work performed during regular or overtime hours. 1 Emergency Service - Regular Time 2 Emergency Service – Overtime, weekends, holidays Mark Up Over Cost (markup not to exceed 25%) Tech + PU $235.00 Tech + BU 2 Hour Response Time 4 Hour Response Time HR $ $265.00 $ $235.00 HR $ $300.00 $ $275.00 ***4 hour minimum mobilization Parts and Materials 1 $ $150.00 EA % 25% 7 Allan Vigil Ford Lincoln 6790 Mt Zion Blvd MORROW, GA (678) 364-3673 Date: Address DEAL WORKSHEET 03/06/2026 Purchaser's Name CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE Phone Res: 4640 NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD STOCKBRIDGE GA 30281 STREET CITY STATE QUANTITY XL 4x4 Sup Body Type NEW USED CARBONIZED GRAY Color 2025 Ford F-150 MAKE MODEL/SERIES Interior Tag# Serial# 1FTEX1LP1SKF54607 Miles FILL OUT THIS SECTION IF USED CAR IS TO BE TRADED IN #1 MAKE/MODEL OF TRADE-IN / BODY TYPE MILEAGE 21 SUGGESTED RETAIL PRICE OVER DISCOUNT SERIAL# TOTAL SALES PRICE #2 MAKE/MODEL OF TRADE-IN / BODY TYPE MILEAGE OVER SERIAL# SALES WORKSHEET $49,348.00 1. TOTAL SALES PRICE 2. LESS TRADE-IN 3. NET DIFFERENCE 4. ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES $799.00 .00 5. GA TAVT $3.00 6. WARRANTY RIGHTS ACT 7. ETR $ 20.00 8. Tag Fee $20.00 9. Other Fees 10. LIEN ON TRADE-IN $50,190 11. SUB TOTAL $4,250.00 12. REBATE 13. LESS CASH $45,940 14. UNPAID BALANCE 15. EXTENDED SERVICE CONTRACT $45,940 16. BALANCE BUYER'S SIGNATURE X SALESMAN (1) Decal // Date of Birth SKF54607 YR HENRY COUNTY YEAR Driver's License# YR (470) 651-6069 ZIP CODE I agree to buy Stock# E-mail Add. Zpearson@stockbridgega.org Phone Bus: (770) 771-3348 Phone Cell: (678) 216-6516 Jonathan Simmons SALESMAN (2) Approved By Over $48,850.00 $500.00 49,348.00 Allan Vigil Ford Lincoln 6790 Mt Zion Blvd MORROW, GA (678) 364-3673 DEAL WORKSHEET Purchaser's Name CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE E-mail Add. zpearson@stockbridgega.org Phone Bus: Phone Cell: (678) 345-2272 Date: 03/06/2026 Address 4545 N HENRY BLVD STOCKBRIDGE GA 30281 HENRY STREET CITY STATE ZIP CODE COUNTY I agree to buy QUANTITY Body Type XL 4x4 Sup NEW Color USED 2025 Ford F-150 MAKE MODEL/SERIES OXFORD WHITE Interior Tag# Serial# 1FTFX1L54SKF61540 Miles FILL OUT THIS SECTION IF USED CAR IS TO BE TRADED IN #1 MAKE/MODEL OF TRADE-IN / BODY TYPE MILEAGE OVER SERIAL# #2 MAKE/MODEL OF TRADE-IN YR 21 // MILEAGE $51,730.00 DISCOUNT $1,200.00 TOTAL SALES PRICE 51,128.00 OVER SERIAL# SALES WORKSHEET $51,128.00 1. TOTAL SALES PRICE 2. LESS TRADE-IN 3. NET DIFFERENCE 4. ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES $799.00 .00 5. GA TAVT $3.00 6. WARRANTY RIGHTS ACT 7. ETR $ 20.00 8. Tag Fee $20.00 9. Other Fees 10. LIEN ON TRADE-IN $51,970 11. SUB TOTAL $3,000.00 12. REBATE 13. LESS CASH $48,970 14. UNPAID BALANCE 15. EXTENDED SERVICE CONTRACT $48,970 16. BALANCE BUYER'S SIGNATURE X Jonathan Simmons SALESMAN (2) Approved By Over SUGGESTED RETAIL PRICE / BODY TYPE SALESMAN (1) Decal Date of Birth SKF61540 YR (678) 345-2272 YEAR Driver's License# Stock# Phone Res: GA 867 4-REBILL,NB,101574,SJ261 VEHICLE DESCRIPTION ULC U W GA C CERTCERTCERT TRD RAMPBUMPCAMPBOOKEXFLROTABATT SK F-150 F54607 EXTERIOR CARBONIZED GRAY METALLIC INTERIOR DARK SLATE CLOTH 40/20/40 2025 F-150 4X4 SUPER CAB 145" WHEELBASE 2.7L V6 ECOBOOST ELEC TEN-SPEED AUTO TRANS INCLUDED ON THIS VEHICLE INTERIOR Ÿ CRUISE CONTROL Ÿ DOOR LOCKS - POWER Ÿ DUAL SUNVISORS Ÿ ILLUMINATED ENTRY Ÿ MESSAGE CTR: OUTSIDE TEMP, COMPASS, TRIP COMPUTER Ÿ TILT/TELESCOPE STR COLUMN FUNCTIONAL Ÿ AM/FM STEREO Ÿ AUTO HOLD Ÿ BLIS W/CROSS-TRAFFIC ALERT Ÿ CLASS IV TRAILER HITCH W/ SMART TRLR TOW CONNECTOR Ÿ CURVE CONTROL Ÿ FORDPASS™ CONNECT 5GWI-FI HOTSPOT TELEMATICS MODEM Ÿ LANE-KEEPING SYSTEM Ÿ POST-COLLISION BRAKING Ÿ PRE-COLLISION ASSIST W/AEB Ÿ REVERSE SENSING AND REAR VIEW CAMERA Ÿ SELECTABLE DRIVE MODES Ÿ SYNC®4 W/EVR & 12" SCREEN OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT/OTHER .17" SILVER STEEL WHEELS .265/70R 17 BSW ALL-TERRAIN 3.55 RATIO REGULAR AXLE 6550# GVWR PACKAGE FRONT LICENSE PLATE BRACKET BLACK PLATFORM RUNNING BOARDS 50 STATE EMISSIONS EXTENDED RANGE 36GAL FUEL TANK FLEET DRL - REPLACE STD DRL SOLD TO Allan Vigil Ford P.O. BOX 100001 Morrow SHIP TO (IF OTHER THAN SOLD TO) (MSRP) $45,560.00 295.00 TOTAL VEHICLE & OPTIONS/OTHER DESTINATION & DELIVERY ____________ 20 combined city/hwy 5.0 MPG 18 city Standard Pickup Trucks range from 12 to 87 MPG. The best vehicle rates 140 MPGe. 23 highway Annual fuel cost $2,600 CH7Z KANSAS CITY METHOD OF TRANSP. CONVOY RAMP TWO 21-1406 O/T 5B TOTAL MSRP Scan The QR Code to get more details about this vehicle ĀÂÞÞށÐñ’åè崛þ›ò償ŒÝþĀÂÞÞÞÂĀ NB spend $3,500 more in fuel costs over 5 years Smog Rating (tailpipe only) This vehicle emits 444 grams CO2 per mile. The best emits 0 grams per mile (tailpipe only). Producing and distributing fuel also create emissions; learn more at fueleconomy.gov. Actual results will vary for many reasons, including driving conditions and how you drive and maintain your vehicle. The average new vehicle gets 28 MPG and costs $9,500 to fuel over 5 years. Cost estimates are based on 15,000 miles per year at $3.50 per gallon. MPGe is miles per gasoline gallon equivalent. Vehicle emissions are a significant cause of climate change and smog. fueleconomy.gov Calculate personalized estimates and compare vehicles 45,855.00 2,195.00 $48,050.00 You Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating (tailpipe only) 45.00 FINAL ASSEMBLY PLANT SKF54607 compared to the average new vehicle. gallons per 100 miles NO CHARGE 250.00 NO CHARGE RAMP ONE 1FTEX1LP1 Fuel Economy and Environment NO CHARGE ITEM #: SHIP THROUGH WARRANTY Ÿ 3YR/36,000 BUMPER / BUMPER Ÿ 5YR/60,000 POWERTRAIN Ÿ 5YR/60,000 ROADSIDE ASSIST Ÿ 8YR/100,000 HYBRID BATTERY PRICE INFORMATION BASE PRICE TOTAL OPTIONS/OTHER 21B 122 GA 30260 SAFETY/SECURITY Ÿ ADVANCETRAC™ WITH RSC® Ÿ AIRBAGS - FRONT SEAT MOUNTED SIDE IMPACT Ÿ AIRBAGS - SAFETY CANOPY® Ÿ CTR HIGH MOUNT STOP LAMP Ÿ PERIMETER ALARM Ÿ SECURE PKG 1 YR INCLUDED Ÿ SOS POST-CRASH ALERT SYS™ Ÿ TIRE PRESSURE MONIT SYS (MSRP) EQUIPMENT GROUP 101A ŸXL SERIES ƬŗƈijƔĽƧŗƣıƃőƧŊƚŤƪœŸœŸĵƒķŮŗ ƬŕŋŒŒŽƬƉŮŝijŭƖŐŖĭţĵƚľƂūōńłƂ ƬŊıōűƦŽƔůŊƀŪƢƝƋƒńƝƌųƌōōŤĸŗ ƩšƁƉřƉƁũŁıőƉšőıũũƩƑơőŁƉűƑƁ Fuel Economy STANDARD EQUIPMENT INCLUDED AT NO EXTRA CHARGE EXTERIOR Ÿ DAYTIME RUNNING LAMPS Ÿ EASY FUEL® CAPLESS FILLER Ÿ FULLY BOXED STEEL FRAME Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTO HIGH BEAM Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTOLAMP (ON/OFF) Ÿ LED REFLECTOR HEADLAMPS Ÿ LOCKING REMOVABLE TAILGATE Ÿ MANUAL FOLD POWER MIRRORS Ÿ PICKUP BOX TIE DOWN HOOKS Ÿ POWER TAILGATE LOCK Ÿ TRAILER SWAY CONTROL Ÿ WIPERS- INTERMITTENT 032056 867/2300 1FTEX1LP1SKF54607 ĬēĂĐĞďĢĂĖĚĂĝĕĐĆąćāĈĬ µ•´–«£ú£Ä®Í¯Ú½¯ÑŠÂÞñçúâ§§²£¼’ £ ÿ”–ç£ìÖ²‘›£ÙƒŒØè½ç̷̔ÕÎÇà¶Á²þ‰Ñ„ ÌËÓãËˬ©—‡æåû¦¾Œæµ³ò”ÝÊñ ©»‰ üåø† ý õõõ ýÅõ ¥™Å™Í½¥¥±½Á‰ÍÁõÙõÝ¡á SPECIAL ORDER SJ261 R RB X 565 001574 09 26 25 2202509262052 Smartphone QR Code™ KAN-001574 220250926 BLEND 2052 €B^^^B€j!H[dMvG<€B^^^B€ 69%(+)X7tI7rcdR2' *6 e"wm&V+-Ae*A/9LXq8R(>FPyA @!///!@w#h2bM )oe€ *~hOrG AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA GU13 GA 10973 9-NORMAL,NB,001346,SK061 VEHICLE DESCRIPTION W CERTCERTCERT TRD RAMPBUMPCAMPBOOKEXFLROTABATT SK F-150 F61540 EXTERIOR OXFORD WHITE INTERIOR DARK SLATE VINYL 40/20/40 2025 F-150 4X4 SUPER CAB 145" WHEELBASE 5.0L V8 ENGINE ELEC TEN-SPEED AUTO TRANS INCLUDED ON THIS VEHICLE INTERIOR Ÿ CRUISE CONTROL Ÿ DOOR LOCKS - POWER Ÿ DUAL SUNVISORS Ÿ ILLUMINATED ENTRY Ÿ MESSAGE CTR: OUTSIDE TEMP, COMPASS, TRIP COMPUTER Ÿ TILT/TELESCOPE STR COLUMN FUNCTIONAL Ÿ AM/FM STEREO Ÿ AUTO HOLD Ÿ BLIS W/CROSS-TRAFFIC ALERT Ÿ CLASS IV TRAILER HITCH W/ SMART TRLR TOW CONNECTOR Ÿ CURVE CONTROL Ÿ FORDPASS™ CONNECT 5GWI-FI HOTSPOT TELEMATICS MODEM Ÿ LANE-KEEPING SYSTEM Ÿ POST-COLLISION BRAKING Ÿ PRE-COLLISION ASSIST W/AEB Ÿ REVERSE SENSING AND REAR VIEW CAMERA Ÿ SELECTABLE DRIVE MODES Ÿ SYNC®4 W/EVR & 12" SCREEN OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT/OTHER 1018-101S08/26/24GAQQ497 .17" SILVER STEEL WHEELS 5.0L V8 ENGINE .265/70R 17 BSW ALL-TERRAIN 3.31 ELECTRONIC LOCK RR AXLE 7100# GVWR PACKAGE FRONT LICENSE PLATE BRACKET BLACK PLATFORM RUNNING BOARDS 50 STATE EMISSIONS EXTENDED RANGE 36GAL FUEL TANK VINYL 40/20/40 FRONT SEAT LED WARNING BEACONS-AMBER*ACCY BEDLINER-TOUGHBED SPRAYIN*ACCY SOLD TO Allan Vigil Ford P.O. BOX 100001 Morrow SHIP TO (IF OTHER THAN SOLD TO) Allan Vigil Ford P.O. BOX 100001 Morrow (MSRP) GA 30260 SHIP THROUGH KANSAS CITY VPC 8250 NE UNGD P163 KANSAS CITY MO $45,360.00 3,575.00 TOTAL VEHICLE & OPTIONS/OTHER DESTINATION & DELIVERY ____________ 19 combined city/hwy 5.3 MPG 16 city Standard Pickup Trucks range from 12 to 87 MPG. The best vehicle rates 140 MPGe. 24 highway Annual fuel cost $2,750 CH7Z METHOD OF TRANSP. CONVOY ITEM #: 21-1391 O/T 5B TOTAL MSRP Scan The QR Code to get more details about this vehicle ĀÂÞÞÞÂĀÐ™†ë¶å´›Î›ò償ŒÝþĀÂÞÞÞÂĀ spend $4,250 more in fuel costs over 5 years Actual results will vary for many reasons, including driving conditions and how you drive and maintain your vehicle. The average new vehicle gets 28 MPG and costs $9,500 to fuel over 5 years. Cost estimates are based on 15,000 miles per year at $3.50 per gallon. MPGe is miles per gasoline gallon equivalent. Vehicle emissions are a significant cause of climate change and smog. fueleconomy.gov Calculate personalized estimates and compare vehicles 48,935.00 1,995.00 $50,930.00 NB Smog Rating (tailpipe only) This vehicle emits 474 grams CO2 per mile. The best emits 0 grams per mile (tailpipe only). Producing and distributing fuel also create emissions; learn more at fueleconomy.gov. NO CHARGE 650.00 595.00 KANSAS CITY You Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating (tailpipe only) NO CHARGE 250.00 NO CHARGE FINAL ASSEMBLY PLANT SKF61540 compared to the average new vehicle. gallons per 100 miles 420.00 RAMP ONE 1FTFX1L54 Fuel Economy and Environment 1,660.00 RAMP TWO 21B 122 WARRANTY Ÿ 3YR/36,000 BUMPER / BUMPER Ÿ 5YR/60,000 POWERTRAIN Ÿ 5YR/60,000 ROADSIDE ASSIST Ÿ 8YR/100,000 HYBRID BATTERY PRICE INFORMATION BASE PRICE TOTAL OPTIONS/OTHER 21B 122 GA 30260 SAFETY/SECURITY Ÿ ADVANCETRAC™ WITH RSC® Ÿ AIRBAGS - FRONT SEAT MOUNTED SIDE IMPACT Ÿ AIRBAGS - SAFETY CANOPY® Ÿ CTR HIGH MOUNT STOP LAMP Ÿ PERIMETER ALARM Ÿ SECURE PKG 1 YR INCLUDED Ÿ SOS POST-CRASH ALERT SYS™ Ÿ TIRE PRESSURE MONIT SYS (MSRP) EQUIPMENT GROUP 101A ŸXL SERIES ƬŏƀţƔŞƧŔƝıƃőƫņƖŤƪœŸijƘĹŷŧƎŗ ƬŕŋŒƊŽŀŁƆŝijŭĵşŎŶŎĿƈƫŚƟťƌĺƂ ƬņŁşŹƞŽƓŮŀŌŷūźųƍĽőŇŒũķũŜĸŗ ƩĹƉƁőűőũũšũƩŁơıƙƩơƑơƑŁũƁƙƁ Fuel Economy STANDARD EQUIPMENT INCLUDED AT NO EXTRA CHARGE EXTERIOR Ÿ DAYTIME RUNNING LAMPS Ÿ EASY FUEL® CAPLESS FILLER Ÿ FULLY BOXED STEEL FRAME Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTO HIGH BEAM Ÿ HEADLAMPS - AUTOLAMP (ON/OFF) Ÿ LED REFLECTOR HEADLAMPS Ÿ LOCKING REMOVABLE TAILGATE Ÿ MANUAL FOLD POWER MIRRORS Ÿ PICKUP BOX TIE DOWN HOOKS Ÿ POWER TAILGATE LOCK Ÿ TRAILER SWAY CONTROL Ÿ WIPERS- INTERMITTENT 032205 78/249 1FTFX1L54SKF61540 ĬēĂĐĞĐĢĂĖĆąĝĕĐćĂĆąāĬ ¢ „°«°ùæ“Äÿ°Ú½£ÑŠÂÞñçúâ§§²£»’§ †üÀ’ÜÖ¬¸šá•úÃðµç̷̔ÕÎÇà¶Á²¾‰Ñ„ ÌË£»Û㬩Ÿç§¿—¥âŒæ•£ò”ÝÊñ ©»¹ÀÜÅø† ý õõõ ýÅ‘±å••™Í½¥¥±½Á‰ÍÁõÙõý¡á SPECIAL ORDER SK061 N RB 2X 515 001346 10 06 25 2202510146861 Smartphone QR Code™ KAN-001346 220251014 BLEND 6861 €B^^^B€jGddMvG<€B^^^B€ =(1!+=KqY)W7rcdR2' *6 5*SR6V<m`z[I*A/9LXq8R(>FPyA @!///!@wMRbO )oe€ *~hOrG AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA GU13 STATE OF GEORGIA HENRY COUNTY CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) FORD F-150 TRUCKS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, INSPECTIONS DIVISION; APPROVING EXPENDITURES FOR SAID PURCHASES; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stockbridge desires to facilitate responsible community growth and economic vitality to meet the needs of residents; and WHEREAS, Article IX, Section II, Paragraph IV of the Georgia Constitution empowers the governing authority of each county and of each municipality to adopt plans and exercise the power of zoning; and WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge is a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Georgia; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department’s Inspections Division requires dependable and properly equipped vehicles to conduct daily field inspections and support ongoing departmental operations; and WHEREAS, the vehicles currently in use have reached the end of their useful service life, resulting in increased maintenance costs and reduced operational efficiency; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained purchase information for two (2) new 2025 Ford F-150 XL 4x4 SuperCab trucks from Allan Vigil Ford Lincoln, with the following specifications and pricing: 2025 Ford F-150 XL 4x4 SuperCab – Oxford White Stock No.: SKF61540 VIN: 1FTFX1L54SKF61540 Total Sales Price After Rebate: $48,970 2025 Ford F-150 XL 4x4 SuperCab – Carbonized Gray Stock No.: SKF54607 VIN: 1FTEX1LP1SKF54607 Total Sales Price After Rebate: $45,940 WHEREAS, the combined total for both vehicles is Ninety-Four Thousand Nine Hundred Ten Dollars ($94,910), inclusive of administrative charges, applicable fees, and manufacturer rebates; and WHEREAS, funding for these purchases is available and allocated for fleet replacements within the approved FY 2026 City Budget; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of these vehicles will enhance the Inspections Division’s operational reliability, efficiency, and capacity to support community development throughout the City of Stockbridge. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council of the City of Stockbridge, Georgia, as follows: Section 1. The Mayor and Council hereby approve the purchase of two (2) 2025 Ford F150 XL 4x4 SuperCab trucks from Allan Vigil Ford Lincoln at a combined cost not to exceed $94,910. SECTION 2. Intention of the Governing Body. It is the intention of the governing body, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances, City of Stockbridge, Georgia, and the sections of the Resolution may be renumbered to accomplish such intention. SECTION 3. Severability. In the event that any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Resolution is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall in no manner affect the remaining portions of this Resolution, which shall remain in full force and effect as if the invalid or unconstitutional section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase was not originally a part of this Resolution. SECTION 4. Approval of Execution. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign all documents necessary to effectuate this Resolution. SECTION 5. Attestation. The City Clerk is authorized to execute, attest to, and seal any documents which may be necessary to effectuate this Resolution, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. SECTION 6. Repeal of Conflicting Provision. Except as otherwise provided herein, all Resolutions or parts of Resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby repealed. SECTION 7. Authority to Amend. The City Attorney is granted the authority to amend or correct this Resolution, with the express consent of the City Council, to reflect the intent of the Council and to ensure compliance with applicable laws. Section 8. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. RESOLVED AND ADOPTED, this ___ day of ______________, 2026. Jayden Williams, Mayor ATTEST: (SEAL) Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk APPROVED S TO FORM: Quinton G Washington, City Attorney
  • 2026-03-31 · City Council · Minutes · Work Session Meeting · Minutes

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Minutes · Work Session Meeting · Minutes

    2026-03-31 · City Council · Minutes · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 e10149bd · pages 6 · method: ocr

    Full text — searchable
    --- page 1 --- stockbridge CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SUMMARY MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026 6:00 P.M. Mayor & City Council Mayor Jayden L. Willams At-Large Mayor Pro Tem Elton Alexander — Council District 5 Councilmember LaKeisha Gantt — Council District 1 Councilmember Antwan Cloud — Council District 2 Councilmember Kyle D. Berry, Sr. — Council District 3 Councilmember Yolanda Barber — Council District 4 Administration Shawn Edmondson — City Manager Frank Milazi - City Treasurer Cassandra Lester — Interim City Clerk Quinton Washington — City Attorney Megan McCullough — Associate Attorney Mission: To provide visionary leadership and superior municipal services that enhance the quality of life for citizens while creating a welcoming business atmosphere focused on sustainability and expansion of tourism and cultural events. Mayor Williams called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Councilmember Berry led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. All members were present; Councilmember Gantt arrived at 6:39pm. Mayor Williams requested adoption of the agenda with an amendment to add item number 10 under New Business for the 2025 audit agreement from the city's auditor, as confirmed by City Treasurer Frank Milazi. Motion: Councilmember Berry motioned to amend and adopt the agenda to add item number 10 for the 2025 audit agreement; seconded by Councilmember Yolanda Barber. The Motion passed 4-0. Approval of the City Council Special Called Meeting Minutes February 12, 2026 Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to approve the February 12, 2026 minutes; seconded by Councilmember Cloud. The Motion passed 4-0. Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes March 09, 2026 Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to approve the March 09, 2026 minutes; seconded by Councilmember Cloud. The Motion passed 4-0. 1|Page --- page 2 --- Interim Clerk Lester noted six public comments were submitted. Michelle Moody (100 Mimosa Drive) raised safety concerns about the intersection of Hillcrest Road and Bowen Drive, citing a dangerous creek with a steep drop-off and requesting consideration of a guardrail or barrier. She provided photographs and was directed to follow up with City Manager Mr. Edmondson. Charles Dubs (108 South Lee Street) spoke in opposition to the Lee Street name change, presenting documentation showing former Mayor Lee lived at 108 South Lee Street for years. He detailed Lee's contributions to Stockbridge, including helping establish Stockbridge High School, getting streets paved from McDonough to Atlanta, and bringing electricity to the city. Council voted 3-0-2 to allow him to complete his comments beyond the three-minute limit. Willie Carter (123 Wilson Ave) opposed the street name change, noting the city already has Martin Luther King Heritage Trail and expressing concern that changing the name would not benefit the underprivileged community area. Anthony Ford (708 Lilly Glenn Lane) spoke in favor of the street name change, explaining it would create MLK-named streets on both sides of downtown as it develops. He noted his personal connection to Dr. King through their shared fraternity membership and suggested adding "Doctor" to the proposed name. Ford believed this would make Stockbridge unique in having father and son honored on both sides of downtown. Judy Neal (174 Eagles Club Drive) opposed the name change, citing concerns about impacts on businesses like Pinehurst catering facility, potential delays in Google Maps updates, and costs. She referenced the estimated $95,000-$130,000 cost of statues in today's money and argued the city should focus on supporting Henry County School System initiatives instead of pursuing divisive street renaming. Charles Marshall (140 Somerset Hills) supported the street name change, noting that 955 streets have been named or renamed after MLK across 41 states and 1,000 other places worldwide. He emphasized the King family's historical connection to Stockbridge and the opportunity to honor Dr. King's legacy alongside the existing MLK Senior Heritage Trail. PRESENTATION Henry County Schools City of Stockbridge Update Presentation Assistant Superintendent Dr. Cemond Robinzine presented updates on behalf of Henry County Schools, joined by board members and principals from Stockbridge cluster schools. The presentation highlighted that Henry County Schools is the eighth largest district in Georgia with approximately 42,000 students and over 6,000 employees, making it the largest employer in Henry County. Key highlights included the community-inspired strategic plan with five strategic actions focusing on learning opportunities, educator retention, community connections, health and wellness, and operational culture. The district has achieved notable successes including Stockbridge Elementary School exiting the federal Target Support 2|Page --- page 3 --- Improvement designation, significant safety infrastructure investments totaling over $30 million, and expansion of arts and STEM programs. The presentation covered upcoming E-SPLOST VIl initiatives and the development of a new five-year strategic plan. Mayor Williams opened the floor for discussion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander asked about a previous study on school capacity that indicated pockets of high intensity but overall available seats in the school system despite community growth; Questioned how the recent school enrollment trends align with growth and capacity planning. Deputy Superintendent Summer Cox confirmed the district conducts periodic enroliment studies with external partners. She noted a slight overall reduction in school enroliment over recent years, consistent with state and national trends and projected some growth in enrollment at specific schools over the next 5-10 years, with plans for additions at Dutchtown Elementary and Tussahaw Elementary. Mentioned that community development does not always translate to increased school enroliment. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander asked about growth and capacity specifically for Flippin Elementary and Union Grove Elementary schools, noting that many students in his district attend these schools while having McDonough addresses. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander then requested data on these schools’ enroliments and expressed interest in pursuing safe routes to school funding for sidewalk connections in new neighborhoods near Hickory Flat Elementary and Flippin Elementary. Deputy Superintendent Summer Cox acknowledged the requests and indicated willingness to follow up on possible sidewalk projects and safe routes to school funding. Noting that the E-SPLOST VII plan is under review and that suggestions for sidewalk improvements may be considered for future projects. Councilmember Gantt inquired about population planning and expressed appreciation for reduced use of trailers and new school additions. CONSENT AGENDA Confirmation of the Chief of Police Scott Hamilton with an official start date of April 13, 2026. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to confirm Scott Hamilton as the new Chief of Police with an official start date of April 13, 2026; seconded by Councilmember Cloud. The Motion passed 5-0. Chief Hamilton addressed the governing body, thanking them for their confidence and promising to elevate the already respected Stockbridge Police Department to the next level with professionalism, transparency, and accountability. He introduced his family and committed to serving his new Stockbridge family. 3|Page --- page 4 --- Mayor Pro Tem Alexander noted that Chief Hamilton is the first African American police chief appointed in both the city of Austell and the city of Stockbridge. OLD BUSINESS Street Name Changes for North Lee Street and South Lee Street Community Development Director Ryan Anderson reported that staff conducted additional research through over 60 pages of documents but could not find conclusive evidence of who Lee Street was named after. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to rename North Lee Street and South Lee Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Way; seconded by Councilmember Gantt. Discussion: Councilmember Barber stated her opposition to the name change. She emphasized that North Lee and South Lee streets are in her district, and the initiative did not originate from her, but affects the residents and stakeholders in the district she is duly elected to represent. She expressed concern about impacts on homeowners and business owners who have lived on Lee Street for decades and noted their public comments opposing the change. Barber requested that council reconsider the initiative, stating it would not benefit her district. Councilmember Berry questioned Mr. Anderson about the research findings. Anderson confirmed they found evidence of former Mayor Lee living on Lee Street but could not locate definitive documentation stating the street was named after him. Based on typical street naming conventions involving largest property owners, first settlers, landmarks, or famous people, Anderson suggested it could “likely” be concluded the street was named after the Lee family. Councilmember Barber presented and referenced an administrator's deed of sale stamped by Henry County that showed William Jackson Lee's connection to the property, citing it supported the street being named after former Mayor Lee. Mayor Williams called for the vote: The Motion passed 3-1-1 (Councilmember Barber opposed, Counciimember Berry Abstained). NEW BUSINESS Council consideration to approve the increase in the City's paid Basic Life Insurance benefit from $10,000 to $50,000, effective April 1, 2026. Human Resources Director Dwayne Pollock presented the proposal using the EPAS model (enhance, provide, align, strengthen) to improve employee benefits. He noted that the current life insurance policy benefit amount of $10,000 is insufficient and is not enough to cover typical funeral expenses in today’s economy. The increase would raise monthly costs from $2.65 to $11.20 per employee, with a total annual cost increase of $19,000. Mr. Pollock emphasized that the adjustment would demonstrate the City’s commitment to employee well-being, provide stronger financial protection, improve competitiveness with peer municipalities, and support talent recruitment and retention. Councilmember Barber inquired about a specific budget line item, to which Mr. Pollack confirmed that the line item is described as "employee group life insurance.” 4|Page --- page 5 --- Councilmember Barber then asked for the approved budgeted amount for this line item. Mr. Pollack responded, “when we receive the annual renewals for the carrier for insurance, the annual amount for this particular coverage is $5,846.00.” Motion: Councilmember Gantt motioned to authorize the increase of the city's basic life and AD&D benefit from $10,000 to $50,000 effective April 1, 2026; seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. The Motion passed 5-0. Council consideration to approve Dianna Hunt & Associates, Inc. to provide acquisition services for approximately 43 parcels in connection with the Tye Street Multi-Use Path Project right-of-way acquisitions - First phase of acquisition services estimated to forty thousand dollars. Funding source is from TSPLOST. Public Works Director Decius Aaron explained this is a TSPLOST project where plans have been prepared and easements drawn up. The request is to use Diana Hunt and Associates for the first phase of three phases of easement preparation. Motion: Councilmember Berry motioned to approve; seconded by Councilmember Cloud. Discussion: Councilmember Barber inquired about how many phases to the project has, to which Mr. Aaron confirmed there are three total phases to the project. Mayor Williams called for the vote: The Motion passed 5-0. Council consideration to approve piggybacking of Macon-Bibb County RFP No. 24-022-LH Traffic Signal Repairs and Maintenance Services, issued April 5, 2024, with Riverside Traffic Solutions, LLC. Mr. Aaron explained that as part of the renewed service delivery strategy and annexation, the city assumed responsibility for multiple traffic signals. Riverside Traffic Solutions previously performed work for Henry County and is familiar with the signals. The company has been responsive to traffic signal issues, and staff recommends continuing their services. Councilmember Barber asked if this would be the first time piggybacking off this specific contract to which Mr. Aaron clarified for “traffic signal maintenance. Yes, ma'am” Motion: Councilmember Gantt motioned to approve; seconded by Councilmember Cloud. The Motion passed 5-0. Council consideration to approve the purchase of two vehicles for departmental use at a cost not to exceed $94,910. The funding for this purchase is available in the fiscal year 2026 budget. Community Development Director Ryan Anderson explained the request is for two vehicles - one for the permitting and inspections division and one for the new business compliance officer position. He noted that in 2023, the city promised five vehicles when permitting and inspection was brought in-house, but this equipment had not been received until now and is presenting the request for two trucks. 5|Page --- page 6 --- Councilmember Barber asked if the purchase was included in the community development budget, to which Mr. Anderson confirmed, “Yes.” Motion: Councilmember Gantt motioned to approve; seconded by Councilmember Berry. The Motion passed 5-0. 2025 Fiscal Audit Agreement City Treasurer Frank Milazi explained that this annual engagement agreement with the audit firm Mauldin and Jenkins is part of their five-year contract from 2023-2028. The agreement stipulates what the auditors will do when they come for the audit on May 4th 2026 and specifies documentation requirements and city responsibilities. Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to approve; seconded by Councilmember Berry. The Motion passed 5-0 MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Williams deferred his comments for executive session. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion to adjourn to executive session for real estate, personnel, litigation, and cybersecurity was made by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander, seconded by Councilmember Cloud. The Motion passed 5-0. Motion to adjourn from executive session made by Councilmember Berry; seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander. The Motion passed 3-0. Counciimembers Gantt and Cloud were not present on the dais. From executive session, associate attorney Megan McCullough presented to governing body a Norfolk Southern lease agreement for real property located at milepost 171.308, with the goal of converting the area into a parking lot for a vote. Motion: Councilmember Cloud motioned to approve the lease agreement; seconded by Councilmember Barber. The Motion passed 5-0. Motion to adjourn the meeting made by Councilmember Gantt; seconded by Councilmember Berry. The motion passed 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:56pm Respectfully submitted by: @ Spnee Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk fl ||I|ams Mayor 6|Page
  • 2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Youth Council Advisory Committee · Agenda

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Youth Council Advisory Committee · Agenda

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 08b68f5e · pages 2 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Dr. Alfreda Renee Gourdine, Chair Ayesha Gambles, Vice-Chair Youth Council Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda March 19, 2026 6:30 PM Joc’Quelyn Carter, Treasurer Sharika Zellars, Student Liaison Vacant, Secretary Valerie Richmond-Reese, Parliamentarian MEMBERS-AT-LARGE Tykera Goins Gernita Johnson Candis Jones Georgia McIntyre Denita Webb Dr. Thomas Smith STAFF LIAISON Cassandra Lester STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2026 6:30 PM I. II. III. IV. Call to Order 1. Invocation Followed by Pledge 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Agenda 4. Approve February 19, 2026 Meeting Minutes Old Business 5. Welcome New Advisory Committee Member 6. Track it Forward 7. SYC Recruitment 8. SPD/SYC Dinner and Discussion 9. SYC Entrepreneur Expo Update 10. Calendar Report End of Year/Upcoming Year 11. Budget Report New Business 12. Senior Banquet 13. SYC Wellness Videos/Anti-Bullying Videos Adjourn The Youth Advisory Council Committee is to make recommendations to Council based on the following Terms of Reference. 1. To identify and advise on youth issues in the City of Stockbridge. 2. To advise Council on the development of policies that are responsive to the needs of youth. 3. To consult with local youth and feedback results of consultations to Council. 4. To assist in the ongoing development and delivery of youth-targeted projects and programs. 5. To create opportunities for youth leadership development by acting as a resource for youth activities. Note: This Committee meets monthly on selected dates.
  • 2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Youth Council Advisory Committee · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Youth Council Advisory Committee · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 43c7c0ee · pages 2 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Dr. Alfreda Renee Gourdine, Chair Ayesha Gambles, Vice-Chair Youth Council Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda March 19, 2026 6:30 PM Joc’Quelyn Carter, Treasurer Sharika Zellars, Student Liaison Vacant, Secretary Valerie Richmond-Reese, Parliamentarian MEMBERS-AT-LARGE Tykera Goins Gernita Johnson Candis Jones Georgia McIntyre Denita Webb Dr. Thomas Smith STAFF LIAISON Cassandra Lester STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2026 6:30 PM I. II. III. IV. Call to Order 1. Invocation Followed by Pledge 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Agenda 4. Approve February 19, 2026 Meeting Minutes Old Business 5. Welcome New Advisory Committee Member 6. Track it Forward 7. SYC Recruitment 8. SPD/SYC Dinner and Discussion 9. SYC Entrepreneur Expo Update 10. Calendar Report End of Year/Upcoming Year 11. Budget Report New Business 12. Senior Banquet 13. SYC Wellness Videos/Anti-Bullying Videos Adjourn The Youth Advisory Council Committee is to make recommendations to Council based on the following Terms of Reference. 1. To identify and advise on youth issues in the City of Stockbridge. 2. To advise Council on the development of policies that are responsive to the needs of youth. 3. To consult with local youth and feedback results of consultations to Council. 4. To assist in the ongoing development and delivery of youth-targeted projects and programs. 5. To create opportunities for youth leadership development by acting as a resource for youth activities. Note: This Committee meets monthly on selected dates.
  • 2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Planning Commission · Agenda

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Planning Commission · Agenda

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 2234252b · pages 2 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD MEMBERS Trameka Walker, Chair Vacant, Vice-Chair Planning Commission Meeting Agenda March 19, 2026 6:30 PM Meeka Douglas Sharonda Gardner Lisa Glenn Darryl Thompson ADMINISTRATION Ryan Anderson Community Development Director Veronica Green Chief Planner Linda Logan Senior Planner, Secretary Gordon Linton, Senior Planner Brennen Reilly, GIS Analyst / Planner II Valerie Ross, Attorney STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2026 6:30 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. INVOCATION III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. ROLL CALL V. WELCOME TO NEW BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF INTRODUCTIONS VI. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1 December 2, 2025 Summary Minutes VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS IX. TRAINING FOR PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD MEMBERS Item # 1 - Three-Part Training Presented by: X. PUBLIC HEARING Item # 1 - VARIANCE CASE #VR-2026-01. (Property is located in Council District 2.) Consideration of a variance application for the request of two variances, as are listed below, for Parcel #S20-03003000 on Wilson Avenue to allow for the construction of a new single-family detached dwelling. Property Owners: Laura Bernal Gopar and Luis A. Gopar-Carmona. Applicant: Jerry Robinson. The property is located in Land Lot 36 of District 12, and it contains 0.613 +/- acres. ~ Variance Request #1: Reduce the front yard setback from the required 50 feet to 25 feet within the SR (Suburban Residential) zoning district. ~ Variance Request #2: Reduce the rear yard setback from the required 40 feet to 20 feet within the SR (Suburban Residential) zoning district. Presented by: Linda Logan XI. PROJECT UPDATES XII. STAFF COMMENTS XIII. BOARD COMMENTS XIV. ADJOURN
  • 2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Planning Commission · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Planning Commission · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-19 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 869c7c9e · pages 82 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD MEMBERS Trameka Walker, Chair Vacant, Vice-Chair Planning Commission Meeting Agenda March 19, 2026 6:30 PM Meeka Douglas Sharonda Gardner Lisa Glenn Darryl Thompson ADMINISTRATION Ryan Anderson Community Development Director Veronica Green Chief Planner Linda Logan Senior Planner, Secretary Gordon Linton, Senior Planner Brennen Reilly, GIS Analyst / Planner II Valerie Ross, Attorney STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2026 6:30 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. INVOCATION III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. ROLL CALL V. WELCOME TO NEW BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF INTRODUCTIONS VI. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1 December 2, 2025 Summary Minutes VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS IX. TRAINING FOR PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD MEMBERS Item # 1 - Three-Part Training Presented by: X. PUBLIC HEARING Item # 1 - VARIANCE CASE #VR-2026-01. (Property is located in Council District 2.) Consideration of a variance application for the request of two variances, as are listed below, for Parcel #S20-03003000 on Wilson Avenue to allow for the construction of a new single-family detached dwelling. Property Owners: Laura Bernal Gopar and Luis A. Gopar-Carmona. Applicant: Jerry Robinson. The property is located in Land Lot 36 of District 12, and it contains 0.613 +/- acres. ~ Variance Request #1: Reduce the front yard setback from the required 50 feet to 25 feet within the SR (Suburban Residential) zoning district. ~ Variance Request #2: Reduce the rear yard setback from the required 40 feet to 20 feet within the SR (Suburban Residential) zoning district. Presented by: Linda Logan XI. PROJECT UPDATES XII. STAFF COMMENTS XIII. BOARD COMMENTS XIV. ADJOURN 1 City of Stockbridge Mission: To provide visionary leadership and superior municipal services that enhance the quality of life for citizens while creating a welcoming business atmosphere focused on sustainability and expansion of tourism and cultural events. SUMMARY MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025 AT 6:30 p.m. ___________________________________________________________________________________ BOARD MEMBERS: Trameka Walker, Chairperson Stanley Dumas Harold Thibodeaux David Planchon Anthony Mitten ADMINISTRATION: Ryan Anderson, Community Dev. Director Valerie Ross, City Zoning Attorney Veronica Green, Chief Planner Linda Logan, Senior Planner / PC Secretary Gordon Linton, Senior Planner Jarvis Richardson, Planning Intern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. CALL TO ORDER—Made by Chairperson Walker at 6:30 p.m. II. INVOCATION—Given by Stanley Dumas. III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Done in unison. IV. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: ~ Trameka Walker _____X_____ __________ ~ Stanley Dumas _____X_____ __________ ~ Harold Thibodeaux _____X_____ __________ ~ David Planchon _____X_____ __________ ~ Anthony Mitten _____X_____ __________ City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 2 A quorum of members was achieved. V. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA A motion was made by David Planchon to adopt the agenda, and Stanley Dumas seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the agenda was unanimously adopted. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – June 26, 2025 Summary Minutes. A motion was made by David Planchon to approve the minutes, and Harold Thibodeaux seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the minutes were unanimously adopted. ______________________________________________________________________ VII. FINAL PLAT CASE #FP-2025-01. (Council District 5) Consideration of the proposed final plat for the creation of a mixed residential subdivision (with townhomes and single-family detached homes) on property at 1448 and 1468 Flippen Road. The final plat has been approved by the Community Development Staff, and it now requires the Planning Commission Chairman’s signature prior to being officially recorded at Henry County Superior Court. Property Owners of 1448 Flippen Road: William K. Reichert and Brenda A. Reichert. Property Owner of 1468 Flippen Road: Willard D. Gilreath. Applicant: Land Buyers of America, LLC. Agent: Michael Kaner. The property is located in Land Lots 11 and 12 of District 6, and it contains 21.771 +/- acres. Staff Presentation—A PowerPoint presentation was made by Jarvis Richardson, Community Development Intern. He provided a brief background on the recent annexation and rezoning of the property at 1448 and 1468 Flippen Road, and he described the developer’s proposed development of a mixed residential development on the property, to be named “Hanover Park.” Then he explained the need for the signatures of the Chairperson on several hard copies of the final plat for the subdivision. Ryan Anderson stated that the signatures would take place after the conclusion of the meeting. Board Action—Stanley Dumas made a motion to approve the final plat, and Harold Thibodeaux seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the final plat was unanimously approved. After the conclusion of the meeting, Chairperson Walker signed each of the four sets of hard copies of the final plat. Two copies were to be given to the applicant, and two copies were to be kept in the Planning & Zoning Office. _____________________________________________________________________ City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 3 VIII. SPECIAL USE PERMIT CASE #SP-2025-04. (Council District 4.) Consideration of a request for a special use permit for a portion of the property at 4498 North Henry Boulevard to allow the development and operation of a quickserve restaurant with drive-through windows and / or lanes. Property Owner: City of Stockbridge. Applicant: Royal TH, LLC. Agent: Battle Law, PC. Proposed Business: Tim Wharton’s, a coffee restaurant. Zoning District: C-2 (General Commercial). The property is located in Land Lot 61 of District 12 within the Stockbridge City Limits, and it contains 1.32 +/- acres. The applicant intends to develop only a 0.8-acre portion of the property. Staff Presentation—Gordon Linton gave a PowerPoint presentation of this case. He explained that a special use permit was required because the property is located within the Downtown Village Overlay District, which requires a special use permit for establishments having drive-through facilities. Board Question—Harold Thibodeaux asked Mr. Linton for an explanation of the overlay district, and Mr. Linton responded. Applicant’s Presentation—Josh Mahoney of Battle Law spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said that this would be a great economic development opportunity because it meant that a dormant tract of land could finally be activated. Staff Comment—Ryan Anderson said that the applicant has met all of the requirements. Board Questions and Comments—David Planchon said that he was not familiar with Tim Horton’s. He asked whether customers would be making a right turn out of the property. Mr. Mahoney replied that he was not sure. Stanley Dumas said that there used to be a Huddle House on North Henry Boulevard (and David Planchon remembered it), and that this would be a good complement. Trameka Walker asked whether there would be competition with the other nearby coffee shops. She asked how this one would stand out from the others. Mr. Mahoney said that Tim Horton’s wanted to establish a better presence in the Southeast. Public Hearing—There were no public speakers for this case. Board Action for SP-2025-04—Anthony Mitten motioned to approve SP-2025-04 and David Planchon seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the case was unanimously approved. City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 4 IX. ZONING MODIFICATION CASE #ZM-2025-02. (Council District 4.) Consideration of a request for a zoning modification to Rezoning Case #RZ-202302 for property at 258 and 264 Valley Hill Road, plus Parcel #S08-01020000, for the purposes of 1) increasing the number of subdivision lots from 16 to 28, and 2) changing the location and types of amenities to be included within the subdivision. Zoning District: SR (Suburban Residential). Property Owners: Claudia Perez Granados (for 258 Valley Hill Road) and Alejandro Granados Encinales (for 264 Valley Hill Road and Parcel #S08-01020000). Applicants: Claudia Perez Granados and Alejandro Granados Encinales. Agent: Jacqueline Funicello. The property is located in Land Lot 92 of District 12 within the Stockbridge City Limits, and it contains 17.062 +/- total acres within three parcels, as are described below. • 258 Valley Hill Road (Parcel #S09-06010000)--Contains 2.2492 +/- acres. • 264 Valley Hill Road (Parcel #S08-01010000)--Contains 6.5254 +/- acres • Unaddressed Parcel (Parcel #S08-01020000)--Contains 8.2874 +/- acres). Staff Presentation—Gordon Linton gave a PowerPoint presentation. He explained that the applicant was previously approved (via RZ-2023-02) to build a subdivision with 16 single-family detached homes, but that now, he was seeking a zoning modification for two reasons: 1) to increase the number of homes to 28; and 2) to change the types of amenities to be provided and to locate them at the rear of the property instead of at the front. Mr. Linton read through the Staff’s long list of recommended conditions of approval. Board Questions and Comments—Anthony Mitten asked the applicant whether the adjacent homes to the east were located in the City, and whether they were served by City sewer. Ryan Anderson said that he was unsure, but that Henry County probably required lots with more than one acre to be on public sewer. Stanley Dumas needed confirmation that those properties were annexed into the City. Harold Thibodeaux asked whether the City had any requirements that the adjacent properties have public sewer. Mr. Anderson said that that was a Public Works question, and that it was outside of the scope of the staff’s review. Applicant’s Presentation—Alejandro Grenados of 264 Valley Hill Road said that he wanted to modify his previous approval (via RZ-2023-02) since he received an approval letter from Public Works regarding the sewer line extension that he obtained from an adjacent property owner. Board Questions—Harold Thibodeaux clarified that now that the applicant had obtained a sewer easement for a sewer line extension, that enabled him to build more homes. Mr. Grenados confirmed that. Mr. Thibodeaux asked the applicant whether he had talked with any of the neighbors about his proposal. Mr. Grenados said that he has eliminated the pickleball courts, clubhouse, and pool. Veronica Green said that the project already had rezoning approval. Linda Logan clarified that this is a zoning modification case, whose purposes are 1) to increase the City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 5 number of lots and homes; and 2) to relocate the amenities to the rear, even though a zoning condition required them to be located at the front of the property. Anthony Mitten asked whether the applicant had talked with the neighbors. Trameka Walker asked about the proposed home prices. Mr. Grenados said that they would be priced from $350,000 to $380,000. Public Hearing: 1. Susan Grosvenor of 310 Valley Hill Road—Ms. Grosvenor said that she is the largest landowner adjacent to the subject property, and that the applicant never had contacted her (no call or letter). She said that the proposed amenities would be located literally right outside of her door. She spoke about potential traffic from so many homes, mosquitoes from the detention pond, and noise from the amenities. 2. Mary Elliott of 181 Valley Hill Road and 21 North Davis Drive—Ms. Elliott said that she did not receive a letter to notify her of this case. She said that this subdivision was going to have 16 houses on good-sized lots, and that was going to be a lot nicer than having the proposed 28 houses on smaller lots. She would love to have public sewer, but no one has offered that to her. Board Questions and Comments—Harold Thibodeaux said that he understood people’s issues about this development, but that this Board does not have the final say. Board Action—David Planchon motioned to approve ZM-2025-02 (with staff’s recommended conditions) and Harold Thibodeaux seconded it. A vote was taken, and the case was approved, 3-1, with Anthony Mitten being opposed. X. ANNEXATION CASE #AX-2025-02. (Property would be located in Council District 5.) Consideration of a request for the annexation, using the 100 percent annexation method, of the property at 2220 Jodeco Road (off Feucht Drive), plus the adjacent Parcel #052-01020001, from unincorporated Henry County into the Stockbridge City Limits. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a multifamily (apartment) development. Property Owner: Kenneth J. Butcher as representative for Glenn D. Cook, Carol J. Cook, Julia A. Cook, Bryan Cook, and Debra C. Butcher. Applicant: Emory Equity, LLC. Agent: Dennis J. Webb, Attorney with the law firm of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP. The property is located in Land Lot 51 of District 6, and it contains two parcels, as are listed below, with 24.995 + / total acres. ~ 2220 Jodeco Road -- Contains 21.494 +/- acres. ~ Parcel #052-01020001 – Contains 3.501 +/- acres. City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 6 Staff Presentation—Gordon Linton gave a joint presentation for AX-2025-02, CP-2025-03, and RZ-2025-04. He first gave an overview of the proposed apartment development, then he presented the purpose and recommendations for each case. He also read into the record the Staff’s recommended zoning conditions for RZ-2025-04. Mr. Linton said that there would be 321 total units, at a density of 12.84 units per acre. The buildings would be three stories high, and their facades would be constructed of a mixture of stone and siding. The existing large lake in the center of the property would be the focal point of the site. The lake would be surrounded by walking paths. The proposed amenities would include a meditation garden, a dog park, a clubhouse, and a pool. The development would have its primary access from the Western Parallel Connector via an easement. Board Questions and Comments—The Board’s questions and comments pertained to all three cases. Anthony Mitten asked whether this was a standalone project. Ryan Anderson said that the property must be contiguous to the Stockbridge City Limits. Mr. Mitten said that he wanted the area to remain commercial. Mr. Anderson said that the property did not have the required frontage to be commercial. Applicant’s Presentation—Arthur Lynn of Emory Equity made a presentation. He said that he proposed to build 321 units on a 5-acre site, with 5 acres of lake and 5 acres of federally-protected land. The average rent would be $1,700 to $2,000. There would be be an “elevated wetlands walking bridge.” No belowmarket-rent apartments would be included. Construction would begin in 2027 and be completed in 2029. Mr. Lynn gave a short video presentation. The proposed name of the project was “The Baldwin at Serene Lake.” Public Hearing—There were no public speakers for AX-2025-02, CP-2025-03, and RZ-2025-04. Board Questions and Comments—Trameka Walker asked Mr. Lynn whether the rent prices would increase by the time of the completion. Mr. Lynn replied that they would be at market rate. Board Action for AX-2025-02—The Board members took a separate vote for each case. For AX-2025-02, Stanley Dumas made a motion to approve, and Harold Thibodeaux seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and AX-2025-02 was approved, 3-1, with David Planchon being opposed. XI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CASE #CP-2025-03. (Property would be located in Council District 5.) Consideration of a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for property at 2220 Jodeco Road (off Feucht Drive), plus the adjacent Parcel #05201020001, if and after the property is annexed into the Stockbridge City Limits. City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 7 The property currently has the Henry County future land use designation of “HighDensity Mixed-Use”, and the applicant requests that it be assigned the City of Stockbridge’s future land use designation of “High-Density Residential.” Purpose: To allow for the construction of a multifamily (apartment) development. Property Owner: Kenneth J. Butcher as representative for Glenn D. Cook, Carol J. Cook, Julia A. Cook, Bryan Cook, and Debra C. Butcher. Applicant: Emory Equity, LLC. Agent: Dennis J. Webb, Attorney with the law firm of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP. The property is located in Land Lot 51 of District 6, and it contains two parcels, as are listed below, with 24.995 + / - total acres. ~ 2220 Jodeco Road -- Contains 21.494 +/- acres. ~ Parcel #052-01020001 – Contains 3.501 +/- acres. A joint staff presentation, applicant’s presentation, public hearing, and Board questions and comments were held for AX-2025-02, CP-2025-03, and RZ-202504. Separate votes were taken by the Board for each case. Board Action for CP-2025-03—Anthony Mitten made a motion to approve CP2025-03 and Stanley Dumas seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and CP2025-03 was approved, 3-1, with David Planchon being opposed. XII. REZONING CASE #RZ-2025-04. (Property would be located in Council District 5.) Consideration of a request for the rezoning of the property at 2220 Jodeco Road (off Feucht Drive), plus the adjacent Parcel #052-01020001, if and after the property is annexed into the Stockbridge City Limits. The property’s current Henry County zoning district is ‘C-3’ (Heavy Commercial), and the applicant requests that the property be assigned the City of Stockbridge’s zoning district of ‘MFR’ (“Multiple Family Residential”). Purpose: To allow for the construction of a multifamily (apartment) development. Property Owner: Kenneth J. Butcher as representative for Glenn D. Cook, Carol J. Cook, Julia A. Cook, Bryan Cook, and Debra C. Butcher. Applicant: Emory Equity, LLC. Agent: Dennis J. Webb, Attorney with the law firm of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP. The property is located in Land Lot 51 of District 6, and it contains two parcels, as are listed below, with 24.995 + / - total acres. ~ 2220 Jodeco Road -- Contains 21.494 +/- acres. ~ Parcel #052-01020001 – Contains 3.501 +/- acres. A joint staff presentation, applicant’s presentation, public hearing, and Board questions and comments were held for AX-2025-02, CP-2025-03, and RZ-202504. Separate votes were taken by the Board for each case. City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 8 Board Action for RZ-2025-03—Anthony Mitten made a motion to approve RZ2025-03 (including the Staff’s recommended conditions) and Harold Thibodeaux seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and RZ-2025-03 was approved, 3-1, with David Planchon being opposed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------XIII. PROJECT UPDATES To be presented by the Community Development Staff. No action is required. There were no project updates. XIV. STAFF COMMENTS To be presented by the Community Development Staff. No action is required. Ryan Anderson mentioned the upcoming Planning Commission party, to be held on December 18, 2025. He also said that Stanley Dumas and David Planchon were resigning their positions as Planning Commissioners. They both expressed their appreciation for the opportunity to serve the City of Stockbridge. XV. BOARD COMMENTS Trameka Walker thanked Mr. Dumas and Mr. Planchon for their service, and she wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. XVI. ADJOURNMENT Stanley Dumas made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Harold Thibodeaux seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the meeting was unanimously adjourned. The adjournment took place at 8:46 p.m. City of Stockbridge, Georgia Planning Commission Summary Minutes for December 2, 2025 Planning Commission Training 2026 February 2, 2026 Why are you here? Planning Commission: Training Purpose • To get a clear understanding of your role and responsibility as a Planning and Zoning Commissioner • To learn the elements of good decision making • To learn how to prepare for a meeting and the dynamics of an effective public meeting Kudos to you for your willingness to serve! Three Part Training Planning Commission: Training Focus Part 1: The Planning Commission • Role, Authority, Powers and Duties Part 2: Basis for your Recommendation and Making your Recommendation • The role of the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map • Staff’s role and the staff report Part 3: Meeting Procedures • Preparing for the meeting • Conducting the meeting and the public hearing • How to properly make motions [Roberts Rule of Order] • Legal Perspective CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING PART ONE: MEETING PROCEDURES Planning Commission Meeting RESIDENTIAL ZONING TRENDS  Mixed-Use Developments​  Balanced Neighborhoods​  Flexible Design for Environmentally Challenged Properties​  Pedestrian Environments​  Major Corridors​  North Henry Boulevard​  Walt Stephens Road​  Rock Quarry Road​  Flippen Road​  Davis Road STOCKBRIDGE SUBDIVISIONS  Stockbridge contains 9,131 total housing units across five Council Districts.​  The housing inventory includes single-family homes, townhomes, multifamily apartments, and mixed-use residential developments.​  Housing growth and unit distribution vary significantly by district, reflecting different development patterns and planning needs.​ PLANNING COMMISSION: STRUCTURE 1 2 Six members, resident of Stockbridge; nominated by the Mayor Four-year terms; serve only two full; remainder of the expired term 3 Officers: Chair, Vice-Chair & Secretary to the Board 4 Quorum: At least four members; chair will vote only in the instance of a tie vote All commissioners must complete planning training within one year of appointment ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1st regular meeting in January, Planning Commission must elect from its membership a Chair and Vice Chair. The Chair and Vice Chair serve for a term of one year or until the expiration of their term, with the Chair eligible for re-election to additional consecutive year. CHAIR POWERS AND DUTIES Duties  Presides over the Planning Commission Meeting  Placing items on the agenda as requested by the Planning Commission  Reviewing the draft agenda  Exercise general supervision over the business, papers, and property of the Commission  Execute all formal documents on behalf of the Commission Powers  Recognize members of the Planning Commission, staff and citizens desiring to speak during meetings  May rule out of order and admonish any person that makes personal, derogatory or disrespectful comments about Commission members, staff or participants  Call for a recess  Call emergency and special meeting STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS BYLAWS 01 02 03 Adopt the Comprehensive Plan Recommend Development Code Amendments Provide recommendations for specified development applications CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING-PART TWO: MEETING PROCEDURES Planning Commission Meeting I. PREPARING FOR THE MEETING (Slide #1) A. Receipt of Electronic Meeting Materials from the Planning Commission Secretary—About one week prior to the meeting. 1. Notifications--Meeting Date, Time, and Place 2. Meeting Agenda—Lists items to be discussed at the meeting. 3. Summary Minutes from the Previous Meeting—Needs to be reviewed for accuracy prior to the meeting. 4. Copies of Zoning Staff Reports, Maps, Site Plans, and Other Materials—Need to be reviewed prior to the meeting. PREPARING FOR THE MEETING (Slide #2) B. Site Visits to Properties for Zoning Cases This is optional, but encouraged. C. Receipt of Hard Copies of Materials A folder of meeting materials will be given to each Board member just prior to the start of the meeting. D. Chairperson’s Script Prepared by the Planning Commission Secretary for the Chairperson, who will use it to direct the meeting. A. Chairperson--Directs the meeting and ensures that the Conducts the meeting according to the published agenda. II. CONDUCTING THE MEETING B. Planning Commission Secretary: 1.Takes the roll call (four members are required for a quorum) 2. Takes notes of the discussion. 3. Records votes that are taken by the Board members. 4. Intervenes for clarification, errors and ensures proper action is taken III. DISCUSSION OF ZONING CASES AND OTHER ITEMS A. Staff Presentation A Community Development Staff member gives a PowerPoint presentation of the applicant’s proposal, case facts, and staff analyses. B. Staff Recommendation Can be for approval, denial, approval with conditions, or deferral. C. Applicant’s Presentation May be made by the applicant or the applicant’s representative, such as an attorney. D. Board Questions and Comments Directed to both the Staff and the applicant. E. Public Hearing Public speakers must fill out a speaker’s card prior to speaking. Each speaker is allowed only three (3) minutes to speak. III. DISCUSSION OF ZONING CASES AND OTHER ITEMS F. Board Questions and Comments Board members may have additional questions and comments prior to voting. G. Board Action: 1. A board member makes a motion to approve, deny, approve with conditions, or defer the case. The motion is seconded by another board member, then a vote is taken. The vote becomes a recommendation to the City Council, who has the final say. 2. Motions must be made according to the Robert’s Rules of Order. A. City’s Zoning Attorney V. LEGAL MATTERS Attends the meeting to ensure that all proceedings and votes occur according to the following: 1. Planning Commission’s Bylaws. 2. State Zoning Procedures Law. B. Police Presence A Stockbridge police officer attends all public meetings to ensure that order is maintained, especially during public hearings. ROBERT’S RULES OF ORDER FOR MEETINGS The Robert’s Rules of Order are universally-accepted guides for conducting meetings. They contain the following: 1. Robert’s Rules Cheat Sheet 2. Procedure for Handling a Main Motion 3. How to Accomplish What You Want to Do in Meetings ROBERT’S RULES—CHEAT SHEET PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING A MAIN MOTION PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING A MAIN MOTION (Slide #2) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #1) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #2) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #3) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #4) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #5) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN MEETINGS (Slide #6) CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING PART THREE: MEETING PROCEDURES Planning Commission Meeting Variances VARIANCES  Planning and Zoning Commission – Review and make RECOMMENDATIONS to approve, approve with conditions, or deny  Requires a public hearing  Requires a public hearing notice, a sign to be posted on the property and a letter to be mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the property [30 days before the public hearing]  If denied, an application for the same variance can not be considered again until at least 6 months or if new information not previously considered is submitted by the petitioner the 6 months can be waived. If an application is denied by the P&Z Staff, the applicant may appeal the decision.  If denied, the applicant can file an appeal with Henry County Superior Court within 30 days of the decision.  Variances expire after 3 years, if not used. Variance Section 10.1 What is a variance? A variance is a request for relief from regulations in the city’s zoning ordinance [Chapter 10 ]. Two types of variances: • Variance- relief from certain zoning ordinance provisions. • Administrative variance - relief from a minimum setback requirement, not to exceed 10% of such requirement, as long as there are no objections from adjacent property owners. Special Use Permit SPECIAL USE PERMIT  What is a Special Use Permit? Uses that are not classified as permitted uses in zoning districts and therefore only allowed by a Use Permit.  Special Use Permit: In the interest the public health, safety, and welfare, the city council may exercise limited discretion in evaluating the site proposed for a use that requires a special use permit. In exercising such discretion pertaining to the subject use, the city council shall consider each of the following: Special Use Permits Considerations: 1. Whether the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive land use plan adopted by the city council; 2. Compatibility with land uses and zoning districts in the vicinity of the property for which the use permit is proposed; 3. Whether the proposed use may violate local, state and/or federal statutes, ordinances or regulations governing land development; 4. The effect of the proposed use on traffic flow, vehicular and pedestrian, along adjoining streets; 5. The location and number of off‐street parking spaces; 6. The amount and location of open space; 7. Protective screening; 8. Hours and manner of operation; 9. Outdoor lighting; and 10. Ingress and egress to the property. In granting such permits, conditions may be attached as are deemed necessary in the particular case for the protection or benefit of neighbors to ameliorate the effects of the proposed development/use. SPECIAL USE PERMITS  Special Use Permit o Planning Commission – Review and make a RECOMMENDATION to the Mayor and City Council o City Council – Makes the FINAL decision o Requires a public hearing notice and sign posted on the property [30 before the public hearing] o 10 Use Permit Considerations [Section 9.2.4] o Conditions may be attached as deemed necessary o All use permits expire eighteen (18) months from the date of approval by the City Council or as otherwise conditioned unless a LDP, building permit, business license or CO has been issued. REZONING REZONING  What is a rezoning? An action or process to change the zoning classification assigned to a property for the purposes of land use.  Planning and Zoning Commission – Review and make a RECOMMENDATION to the Mayor and City Council  City Council – FINAL decision  A public hearing notice and a sign must be posted on the property no fewer than 15 days and no more than 45 days before the public hearing  Impact Analysis Questions  Conditions may be attached as deemed necessary COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WHAT IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT?  Provides a vision for the future of the community along with steps that are needed to make that vision a reality. It is the basis for land use regulations.  Planning and Zoning Commission – Review and make a RECOMMENDATION to the Mayor and City Council  City Council – FINAL decision  Requires a public hearing notice and sign posted on property [no fewer than 30 days no more than 45 days before the public hearing]  Impact Analysis Questions  Conditions may be attached as deemed necessary MODIFICATIONS (MINOR AND MAJOR) WHAT IS A MAJOR MODIFICATION?  Requested changes to zoning conditions, include allowable uses, maximum density, or compatibility requirements.  Planning and Zoning Commission – Review and make a RECOMMENDATION to the Mayor and City Council (Section 9.2.3)  City Council – FINAL decision  Requires a public hearing notice and sign posted on property [30 days no later than 45 days before the public hearing]  Conditions may be attached as deemed necessary An action or process to change the zoning classification assigned to a property for the purposes of land use. WHAT IS A MINOR MODIFICATION? Director of Community Development– Review and render a decision Conditions may be attached as deemed necessary TRAINING TO BE CONTINUED Basis for your Decision and Making your Decision The role of the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map Staff’s role and the staff report Legal Perspective Henry County, GA Overview Legend Parcels Roads 147 ft Parcel ID Property Address District S20-03003000 Class Residential Owner Acreage 0.61 Address City/Stockbridge BERNAL GOPAR LAURA & GOPAR-CARMONA LUIS A 103 ROSENWALD CIR STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Land Value: Building Value: Misc Value: Total Value: $18,000 $0 $0 Last 2 Sales Date Price Reason Qual 4/21/2023 $18,000 LM Q 1/1/1945 $0 U U $18,000 Parcel lines depicted on the maps do not re ect a true and exact representation of property boundaries and should not be relied upon for said purpose. Property boundary lines are depicted on recorded plats available at the Henry County courthouse or can be determined by employing the services of a licensed surveyor. Date created: 2/12/2026 Last Data Uploaded: 2/12/2026 1:13:26 AM Developed by LETTER OF INTENT BAC Construction Inc 110 Walter Way Unit 1963 6785209509 bac@bac-constructioninc.com February 26, 2026 Stockbridge, Georgia Planning & Zoning Commission 4602 N Henry Blvd Stockbridge Ga 30281 RE: Letter of Intent & Variance Request for Property at 0 Wilson Ave, Parcel ID S20-03003000 Dear Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission, I am writing to formally submit a Letter of Intent and request a variance from the regulations of the Unified Development Code (UDC) for the property located at 0 Wilson Ave, legally known as Parcel ID S20-03003000. The purpose of this variance is to allow for reduction in existing lot setbacks.: • • • "A reduction in the required front-yard setback from 50 feet to 25 feet for the proposed construction of a new single-family residence." "A reduction in the required rear-yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet for the proposed construction of a new single-family residence." Side-yard setback no change. Property and Project Description: The subject property is a residential lot, S20-.3003000 parcel within the Unified Development Code (UDC), specifically section 4.3.2. I am proposing to construct a new single-family residence. Justification for Variance: I believe this request meets the standard for a variance based on the following practical difficulties or unique circumstances associated with this specific property, as outlined in the City/Town zoning ordinance: 1. Unique Physical Circumstances: The property possesses unique conditions not generally found in the surrounding area, such as, an irregular lot shape, significant topographic constraints (steep slope, rock outcropping), an existing non-conforming structure, or unusual dimensions]. These conditions create a practical difficulty in complying with the strict application of the UDC standards for my intended use. 2. No Material Detriment: The requested variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed project, "will be consistent in scale, materials, and design with adjacent properties" or "will be screened from view and will not create noise, traffic, or privacy impacts". It will not be materially detrimental to nearby properties or to the public welfare. 3. Preservation of Property Rights: The strict application of the UDC regulations would result in an unnecessary hardship, depriving me of reasonable use of my property. The variance sought is the minimum necessary to achieve a reasonable use. 4. Consistency with UDC Intent: The variance, if granted, will allow a project that remains consistent with the broader purposes and intent of the Unified Development Code, which is to, "promote thoughtful development, enhance the streetscape, or support viable business operations". I have attached preliminary site plans, drawings, and photographs to illustrate the existing conditions and the proposed work. I am committed to working with your staff to ensure the project meets all other applicable codes and standards. I respectfully request that the Planning & Zoning Commission consider this variance request at your next available public hearing. I am available to answer any questions and to provide additional information as needed. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jerry Robinson BAC Construction Inc. Owner Attachments: • • • • Site Plan Building Elevations/Renderings (if applicable) Photographs of Property Any other supporting documents REVISION APPLICATION BAC Construction Inc 110 Walter Way Unit 1963 6785209509 bac@bac-constructioninc.com I respectfully request that the Planning & Zoning Commission consider this variance request at your next available public hearing. I am available to answer any questions and to provide additional information as needed. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jerry Robinson BAC Construction Inc. Owner Attachments: CRUSHED STONE CONSTRUCTION EXIT EXIT DIAGRAM X X X X X X ENTRANCE ELEVATION Ds1 Ds3 X X X X X Ds2 SILT FENCE - TYPE SENSITIVE SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW 1 TO: Stockbridge Mayor and City Council Stockbridge Planning Commission FROM: Linda M. Logan, Senior Planner, Planning and Zoning Division CC: Ryan Anderson, Community Development Director DATE: March 19, 2026 (Planning Commission Meeting) and April 13, 2026 (City Council Meeting) SUBJECT: Staff Report for Variance Case #VR-2026-01 for Parcel #S2003003000 on Wilson Avenue (Council District 2) PURPOSE The applicant for Variance Case #VR-2026-01, Jerry Robinson of BAC Construction, Inc., proposes to construct a new single-family detached dwelling on Parcel #S20-03003000 on Wilson Avenue within the City of Stockbridge. The subject property is located in Land Lot 36 of District 12, and it has 0.613 +/- acres, according to the applicant’s submitted survey of the property. It is not located in any subdivision. The property is vacant and it has an elongated, tapered shape, as is shown by the aerial photograph. The property is bounded by Wilson Avenue to the west and Wilson Street to the south. The aerial photo and the submitted survey show the presence of a dirt driveway traversing the lower portion of the property. The driveway provides access to a house at 130 Wilson Avenue, which is a land-locked property. The current zoning of the property is SR (Suburban Residential), which has the following minimum required setbacks: 50 feet for the front yard setback, 10 feet for the side yard setback, and 40 feet for the rear yard setback. Because of the irregular shape and dimensions of the lot, the applicant has experienced difficulty in complying with the front and rear yard setbacks. The applicant has therefore requested two variances: ~ Variance Request #1--Request for a variance from Section 2.4.2 (B) of the Stockbridge Unified Development Code (UDC) to allow a reduction in the required front-yard setback from 50 feet to 25 feet for the proposed construction of a new single-family residence. ~ Variance Request #2--Request for a variance from Section 2.4.2.(B) to allow a reduction in the required rear-yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet for the proposed City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 2 construction of a new single-family residence. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY (PARCEL #S20-03003000 ON WILSON AVENUE) City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 3 CASE FACTS TABLE DESCRIPTIVE FACTOR FINDINGS Proposed Development New single-family detached dwelling. Property Location Parcel Identification Parcel Acreage Land District and Land Lot Council District Applicant West side of Wilson Avenue Parcel S20-03003000 0.613 +/- total acres. District 12, Land Lot 36. 2 (Councilmember Antwan Cloud). Jerry Robinson of BAC Construction, Inc. Property Owners Laura Bernal Gopar & Luis A. GoparCarmona. Existing Zoning SR (Suburban Residential). Surrounding Zoning SR (Suburban Residential). Future Land Use Designation Medium-Density Residential Property Conditions Parcel shape--elongated and variable. Surface--level and wooded. Current Use Undeveloped, although a dirt driveway traverses the property near the southern end and provides access to a house at 130 Wilson Avenue, which is a landlocked parcel. ~ North—Vacant land and a church. ~ South—Several houses along Wilson Street. ~ East—Several houses along Carrie Mae Lane, within the Silent Avenue Subdivision, including the house at 130 Wilson Avenue. ~ West—Several houses along Wilson Avenue, plus a small beauty salon. March 4, 2026. Surrounding Land Uses Posting of Zoning Sign City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 4 CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE 2026 ZONING MAP LEGEND: Yellow—SR (Suburban Residential). Pink—C1 (Neighborhood Commercial). Black Star—Subject Property. City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 5 CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE 2026 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LEGEND: Light Orange—Medium-Density Residential Lilac—Downtown District Light Blue—Public/Institutional Black Star—Subject Property. City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 6 BOUNDARY SURVEY (Prepared by Scanlon Engineering Services, Inc. on 4/17/23) City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 7 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The applicant proposes to build a new single-family detached dwelling on the subject property, which would be a permitted use within the SR (Single-Family Residential) zoning district. The new home would have 2,294 total heated square feet, including 1,370 square feet on the first floor and the remaining 924 square feet on the second floor. The home would be situated on the northern portion of the property, which has the largest area. Required Setbacks. In the SR district, the required setbacks are 50 feet for the front yard setback (from Wilson Avenue), 10 feet for the side yard setbacks, and 40 feet for the rear yard setback. The applicant’s proposed site plan on the next page shows these required setbacks and the first-floor footprint of the proposed home. The locations of the required setbacks would leave only a tiny, triangular-shaped area on which to build the home. The front and rear yard setbacks would both be substantially exceeded. This is shown by Site Plan Enlargement #1 on the following page, which shows the required setbacks. Proposed Setbacks. The applicant submitted a site plan, which was prepared by BRC Land Services on 01/28/26. It shows that, in order to have sufficient land area on which to build the proposed home, the applicant has proposed reducing the front and rear yard setbacks by 50 percent each. That is, the front yard setback would be reduced from the required 50 feet to 25 feet (the subject of Variance Request #1) and the rear yard setback would be reduced from the required 40 feet to 20 feet (the subject of Variance Request #2). Site Plan Enlargement #2 depicts these variance requests. The proposed footprint of the home is shown in the shaded area. The proposed new Building Lines of 25 feet and 20 feet, respectively, are shown, and the actual setbacks would be 27.31 feet in the front yard and 21.31 feet in the rear yard. The required 10-front side yard setbacks would be met; thus, no variance would be needed for the side yard setbacks. The side yard setback on the northern side of the home would actually be 12.97 feet. Comparison of Required Versus Proposed Setbacks. Site Plan Enlargement #3 shows both the required and the proposed setbacks for the front and rear yards. The applicant’s proposed setbacks would significantly enlarge the available buildable area for constructing the proposed home. City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 8 PROPOSED SITE PLAN— Shows Location of Proposed Home On the Northern Portion of the Property (Prepared by BRC Land Services on 01/28/26) City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 9 SITE PLAN ENLARGEMENT #1— SHOWS THE REQUIRED SETBACKS Required Setbacks: ~ 50 feet in the front ~ 10 feet on the sides ~ 40 feet in the rear City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 10 SITE PLAN ENLARGEMENT #2— SHOWS THE PROPOSED SETBACKS Proposed Setbacks: ~ 25 feet in the front (Variance Request #1) ~ 10 feet on the sides (no variance) ~ 20 feet in the rear (Variance Request #2) City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 11 SITE PLAN ENLARGEMENT #3— SHOWS BOTH THE REQUIRED SETBACKS AND THE PROPOSED SETBACKS City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 12 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE REQUESTS The applicant has submitted a Variance application to request two variances, as are listed below, for the development of a proposed single-family dwelling on Parcel #S2003003000 on Wilson Avenue. In both variance requests, the applicant is seeking permission to forego compliance with a particular requirement within the Unified Development Code (UDC) regulations. Each variance request has been analyzed by the Planning and Zoning Staff and is discussed below. 1. Variance Request #1—Reduce the front yard setback from the required 50 feet to 25 feet. 2. Variance Request #2—Reduce the rear yard setback from the required 40 feet to 20 feet. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10.1.3 - Criteria to be considered for deciding variances. A variance may be granted only upon a finding by the mayor and city council that all the following conditions are met: A. Extraordinary and exceptional circumstances pertaining to the particular piece of property in question exist due its size, shape, or topography that are not found on other properties in the same zoning district; B. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this unified development code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other properties located in the same zoning district; C. Granting the variance requested will not confer upon the property owner any special privileges that are denied to other owners of property in the same zoning district; D. The variance will be consistent with the purposes and intent of this unified development code, will be compatible with uses on neighboring properties, and will serve the public welfare; E. The extraordinary circumstances are not the result of actions of the applicant; F. The variance is the minimum relief that will allow the legal use of the land, building or structure; and G. The variance is not a request to permit a use of land, buildings or structures that is prohibited in the same zoning district. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 13 Analysis of Variance Criteria Since both variance requests are for the reduction of setbacks rather than any other matter, they may be addressed together within each criterion below. A. Extraordinary and exceptional circumstances pertaining to the particular piece of property in question exist due its size, shape, or topography that are not found on other properties in the same zoning district; The subject property has an irregular shape and a very narrow depth. According to the applicant’s submitted survey, the subject property has a frontage on Wilson Avenue of 519.81 feet, and its greatest depth of 119.81 feet is at the northern end of the property. These dimensions differ significantly from those of most of the other lots along Wilson Avenue, which have an estimated average of 110 feet of frontage and a depth of 200 feet, according to the aerial photographs from the Henry County Tax Assessors’ website. The southern end of the subject property is only an estimated 15 feet deep. B. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this unified development code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other properties located in the same zoning district; The required front yard setback is 50 feet in the SR district, and the required rear yard setback is 40 feet. That means that there must be at least 90 feet of land area, from the front (at Wilson Avenue) to the rear, on which to build a house. Since the deepest area at the northern end of the property has 119.81 feet, that would leave only 29.81 feet, from the front to the rear, on which to build a house. But the property tapers quickly to the south, leaving even less land area on which to build. The applicant’s site plan showing the required setbacks indicates that only a tiny triangular-shaped area would be left on which to build the proposed house. It would therefore not be possible to meet the setback requirements. C. Granting the variance requested will not confer upon the property owner any special privileges that are denied to other owners of property in the same zoning district; The applicant wishes to construct a single-family dwelling on the subject property, just as most of the other properties within the surrounding neighborhood also have single-family dwellings. Without the requested variances, it would not be physically possible to construct a dwelling. Although the proposed house would have 2,294 total heated square feet, only 1,370 square feet would be located on the first floor, and the remaining 924 square feet would be on the second floor. The applicant therefore would be reducing the size of the first floor (the footprint of the house) in order to leave more land area for the front and rear yard setbacks. City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 14 D. The variance will be consistent with the purposes and intent of this unified development code, will be compatible with uses on neighboring properties, and will serve the public welfare; The subject property is located within the SR zoning district, which allows singlefamily detached dwellings. The applicant’s proposed single-family detached dwelling would be compatible with the other single-family detached dwellings in the surrounding neighborhood. The development of the property would therefore represent a positive addition to the neighborhood. Further, since a standard parking space is 20 feet long, the proposed front yard setback of 25 feet would allow any parked car on a driveway off Wilson Avenue to avoid protruding into the street, and no sidewalk is present on the east side of Wilson Avenue. E. The extraordinary circumstances are not the result of actions of the applicant; The applicant did not create the dimensions of the subject property, and the applicant has reduced the size of the footprint of the proposed home in order to not require even greater reductions in the front and rear yard setbacks. F. The variance is the minimum relief that will allow the legal use of the land, building or structure; and Due to the irregular dimensions and shape of the subject property, the requested variances appear to be the only possible relief to enable the property to be developed with a single-family detached dwelling as an allowable use. G. The variance is not a request to permit a use of land, buildings or structures that is prohibited in the same zoning district. The applicant proposes to build a type of use (a single-family detached dwelling) that is permitted within the property’s zoning district, Suburban Residential. STAFF CONCLUSION As a result of the foregoing analysis, the Planning and Zoning Staff has reached the conclusion that the applicant’s requests for front and rear yard setbacks are reasonable and should be granted for the following reasons: 1. The applicant proposes to develop an acceptable type of use on the property. 2. The irregular shape and dimensions of the property represent a significant hardship for developing the property, making it impossible to meet the required setbacks/ City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026 15 VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the Staff Conclusion above, the Planning and Zoning Staff therefore recommends the APPROVAL OF BOTH VARIANCE REQUESTS, with the following three conditions: 1. Size of Dwelling—The proposed single-family detached dwelling shall have at least 1,500 total square feet of heated space in order to meet the minimum required dwelling size within the SR district. 2. Site Plan--The proposed development shall be constructed according to a revised site plan that is very similar to the submitted one, entitled “0 Wilson Avenue”, which was prepared by BRC Land Services as Job No. 025-0024 on 01/28/2026 and revised on 02/24/2026. The revised site plan shall show a driveway in an acceptable location off Wilson Avenue, having a length that would not cause parked vehicles to protrude into the street. 3. Dwelling Facades—The facades of the dwelling shall be constructed of materials which comply with the requirements of the Stockbridge Unified Development Code. City of Stockbridge, GA Community Dev. Dept. / VR-2026-01 Staff Report / March 19, 2026
  • 2026-03-13 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Main Street Advisory Board · Agenda

    2026-03-13 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Main Street Advisory Board · Agenda

    2026-03-13 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 cf9ba912 · pages 2 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    MAIN STREET ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS Willie Hopkins, Chair Shomari Furtch, Vice-Chair Main Street Advisory Board Meeting Agenda March 13, 2026 9:00 AM Camille Reynoso Mason, Secretary Anika Potts Andrea Burnett Vanessa Gibson Linda P. Jones Crystal Park Vacant Kenya Cook (DDA Liaison) Antwan Cloud (City Council Liaison) ADMINISTRATION Lisa Fareed Main Street Program Manager Terezy Ochoa Main Street Program Coordinator William Smith Economic Development Director Downtown Connection Center 130 M L King, Sr. Heritage Trail Stockbridge , GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA MAIN STREET ADVISORY BOARD MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 2026 9:00 AM I. II. Call to Order 1. Roll Call 2. Reading of the Mission Statement 3. Welcome - MSAB Members/ City Staff/ Guests Review and Approval of the Agenda 4. III. Review and Approval of Meeting Minutes 5. IV. December 2026 Meeting Minutes Review and Approve Financial Statement 6. V. January 2026 Meeting Agenda December 2025 Financial Statement Main Street Managers Report/ Discussion 7. Program Updates 8. Downtown Updates VI. DDA Report VII. Announcements/ Concerns VIII. Adjourn Mission: The Stockbridge Main Street Program's mission is to design and support an identifiable downtown historic district that promotes economic vitality, cultivates artistic expression, encourages cultural enrichment, and nurtures community spirit.
  • 2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Public Facilities Authority · Agenda

    2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · Public Facilities Authority · Agenda

    2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 ec8dfb2a · pages 2 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE BOARD MEMBERS Public Facilities Authority Meeting Agenda March 12, 2026 6:00 PM Rashawn George, Chair Mark D. Glenn, Vice-Chair Antonio Gordon Toseika Thomas Mayor Jayden L. Williams Vacant Vacant ADMINISTRATION Shawn Edmondson City Manager Vacant Economic Development Director Cassandra Lester, Recorder Quinton Washington, Attorney STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL LEVI MEETING ROOM 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE THURSDAY, MARCH 12, 2026 6:00 PM I. II. Call to Order 1. Invocation Followed by Pledge 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Agenda 4. Approve April 2nd, 2025 Meeting Minutes New Business 5. Declaration of Permanent Sidewalk Easement and Temporary Driveway Easement - Stockbridge Public Facilities Authority III. Executive Session (if needed) IV. Adjourn
  • 2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Public Facilities Authority · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · Public Facilities Authority · Agenda Packet

    2026-03-12 · Boards & Commissions · Agenda Packet · source: ccscrape-meetings · sha256 6c22ba32 · pages 19 · method: text

    Full text — searchable
    PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE BOARD MEMBERS Public Facilities Authority Meeting Agenda March 12, 2026 6:00 PM Rashawn George, Chair Mark D. Glenn, Vice-Chair Antonio Gordon Toseika Thomas Mayor Jayden L. Williams Vacant Vacant ADMINISTRATION Shawn Edmondson City Manager Vacant Economic Development Director Cassandra Lester, Recorder Quinton Washington, Attorney STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL LEVI MEETING ROOM 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD. STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281 Website: www.stockbridgega.org Phone: 770-389-7900 Fax: 770-389-7912 AGENDA PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY MEETING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE THURSDAY, MARCH 12, 2026 6:00 PM I. II. Call to Order 1. Invocation Followed by Pledge 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Agenda 4. Approve April 2nd, 2025 Meeting Minutes New Business 5. Declaration of Permanent Sidewalk Easement and Temporary Driveway Easement - Stockbridge Public Facilities Authority III. Executive Session (if needed) IV. Adjourn PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES APRIL 2, 2025 6:00PM Present Mayor Anthony S. Ford Rashawn George Antonio Gordon Mark D. Glenn Toseika Thomas Vacant Board Member Vacant- Board Member Vanessa Holiday, Secretary/Recorder Quinton Washington – City Attorney Vacant - City Manager Gerald Sanders, Economic Development Director Absent X X X X X X X X Call to Order made by Mayor Ford Roll Call by the Board Secretary. All members were present. Board member Glenn motioned to approve the Meeting Agenda; Second by Board member George. The motion passed 4-0. Board member George motioned to approve the December 20, 2022 Minutes; Second by Mayor Ford. The motion passed 4-0. Board member Gordon joined the meeting at 6:05 p.m. New Business Election of Officers Board member George was nominated by Board member Glenn for Board Chair, who accepted the nomination. Motion to approve the appointment of Board Member George for Board Chair was approved unanimously 5-0. Board member Glenn was nominated by Board member George for Board Vice Chair, who accepted the nomination. Motion to approve the appointment of Board Member Glenn for Vice Chair was approved unanimously 5-0. Discussion Mayor Ford noted the last action of this board was the bonding of the Amphitheater, and that in August of this year, 2025, the Amphitheater will be paid off; and noted H J Russell Company was the construction company, and TSW (Tunnel Spangler Walsh) were the architects. Mayor Ford noted the city has entered into a 4-year contract with VyStar Credit Union for the Amphitheater naming rights. Mayor Ford noted the City Council recently held a Retreat where the project list of priorities was set, and that this board may be involved in transactions for public facilities such as the Youth/Senior – Community Center, and perhaps the Pedestrian Bridge project. Page 1 of 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES APRIL 2, 2025 6:00PM Mayor Ford noted the city is growing, and development is coming, and the city is excited about the growth, the Wayfinding Project which will include directional signage at Floyd Chapel, the Merle Manders Conference Center, in the downtown area, and throughout the outskirts of the city, and introduced Mr. Gerald Sanders, the city’s Economic Development Director. Chair George asked how the city benefits with VyStar having naming rights. Mayor Ford noted VyStar has committed to a sponsorship of $1.2 million dollars over the next four years. Mr. Sanders gave a brief overview of his background in economic development, and noted the city has made a significant investment in the Wayfinding Project, where there will new directional signage installed around the city; noted the Amphitheater was the first step to boosting the economy with investors buying vacant buildings, opening restaurants, and more to come; noted there will be enhanced lighting in the downtown area, and a potential public/private partnership 4story mixed-use development on the vacant land across from city hall adjacent to the railroad tracks with a parking deck; referenced the $250 million dollar Henry County STEM School coming to the downtown area, with the goal to attract young millennials, noting the downtown area cannot survive with patrons only coming in on the weekend; referenced the Bridges of Jodeco project with restaurants coming in and a potential 5-star Marriott hotel and high-end condos; noted the recently opened Sprouts is the highest grossing store in the metro area; referenced the 50-acre Patrick Henry Pkwy. Development with proposed recreational uses, noting the Master Developer resides in Stockbridge and is investing in Stockbridge and the development of the southside, wanting to make this area a destination for high-tech; noted the positive behind data centers is the city would collect a franchise fee, with businesses balancing out the taxes with commercial taking on the bigger tax burden instead of the residents. Mayor Ford noted the role of the PFA Board being a conduit to help the city fund public facilities and projects, noting the potential expansion of city hall. Motion to adjourn the meeting at 6:55 p.m. was made by Chair George; second by Vice Chair Glenn. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. Minutes prepared by Vanessa Holiday, Secretary/Recorder Page 2 of 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES APRIL 2, 2025 6:00PM Executive Session Criteria Discuss or vote to authorize the settlement of a matter covered by the attorney-client privilege. Identify the case or claim discussed but not the substance of the attorney-client discussion. Discuss or vote to authorize negotiations to purchase, dispose of or lease property. Discuss or vote to authorize the ordering of an appraisal related to the acquisition or disposal of real estate. Discuss or vote to enter into a contract to purchase, dispose of, or lease property subject to approval in a subsequent public vote. Discuss or vote to enter into an option to purchase, dispose of, or lease real estate. Discuss or deliberate upon the appointment, employment, compensation, hiring, disciplinary action or dismissal, or periodic evaluation or rating of a public officer or employee. Meeting to interview one or more applicants for the position of the executive head of an agency. A meeting otherwise required to be open was closed to the public in order to consult and meet with legal counsel pertaining to pending or potential litigation, settlement, claims, administrative proceedings, or other judicial actions brought or to be brought by or against the agency or any officer or employee or in which the agency or any officer or employee may be directly involved and the matter discussed was [identify the matter but not the substance of the discussion. Staff meeting held for investigative purposes under duties or responsibilities imposed by law. GA Code 50-14-2(1) and 50-14-3(b)(1)(A) 50-14-3(b)(1)(B) 50-14-3(b)(1)(C) 50-14-3(b)(1)(D) 50-14-3(b)(1)(E) 50-14-3(b)(2) 50-14-3(b)(2) 50-14-2(1) 50-14-3(a) (1) Page 3 of 3 _____________________________________________________________________________ [SPACE ABOVE RESERVED FOR RECORDER’S USE] UPON RECORDING RETURN TO: Angela Robinson Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 1075 Peachtree Street NE Suite 1500 Atlanta, GA 30309 TAX PARCEL NO. S26-02027000 HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA DECLARATION OF PERMANENT SIDEWALK EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT (No title opinion is expressed or implied by the scrivener.) THIS DECLARATION OF PERMANENT SIDEWALK EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT (this “Declaration”) is made this _______ day of _________________________________________, 2026, by the STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic of the State of Georgia (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”), to and in favor of the CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Georgia (hereinafter referred to as “Grantee”) (the terms Grantor and Grantee to include their respective successors, successors in office and assigns where the context hereof requires or permits). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in Henry County, Georgia identified as Tax Parcel No. S26-02027000 (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, Grantee desires to widen the sidewalks on North Henry Boulevard from Lee Street to East Atlanta Road to enhance pedestrian access and safety (the “Project”); and 1 WHEREAS, Grantor agrees to grant Grantee a non-exclusive permanent easement (hereinafter the “Permanent Easement”) over certain portions of the said Property for the purposes described herein; and WHEREAS, Grantor also agrees to grant Grantee a non-exclusive temporary driveway easement (hereinafter the “Temporary Driveway Easement,” together with the Permanent Easement, collectively, the “Easements”) over certain portions of the said Property for the purposes described herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of ONE AND NO/100 DOLLAR ($1.00) AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, in hand paid, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby expressly grants, conveys and declares unto and in favor of Grantee the Permanent Easement on, over, upon, across, under and through the portions of the Property being more particularly described in EXHIBIT “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference and being more particularly described and shown with solid lines leaning to the right in the acquisition plat prepared by Falcon Design Consultants, dated 6/4/2025 and bearing the seal of Kevin M. Brown, Professional Registered Land Surveyor No. 2960 (the “Acquisition Plat”), attached hereto as EXHIBIT “B” and made a part hereof by this reference (as described and shown, the “Permanent Easement Areas”). The Permanent Easement is granted for all purposes as may be deemed necessary, incidental, or convenient, in Grantee’s sole discretion, for the construction, operation and maintenance of the Project including, but not limited to, the right, permission and authority to: i. construct, operate, use, maintain, repair, relocate and/or replace within the Permanent Easement Areas sidewalk improvements and related infrastructure including, but not limited to, slopes, concrete and paved walkways, curb ramps, drainage structures, landscaping, signage and wayfinding, lighting and other utilities, benches, trash receptacles and other pedestrian amenities (collectively the “Sidewalk Improvements”); ii. provide pedestrian access to and use of the Sidewalk Improvements within the Permanent Easement Areas by the general public for walking, jogging and other non-motorized pedestrian activities; iii. periodic use of the Permanent Easement Areas for mobilization and demobilization of personnel, vehicles, materials, equipment, and machinery related to the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, relocation, or replacement of the Sidewalk Improvements within the Permanent Easement Areas or the adjacent public right of way; iv. periodic use of the Permanent Easement Areas for storage of materials, equipment and machinery related to the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, relocation, or replacement of the Sidewalk Improvements within the Permanent Easement Areas or the adjacent public right of way; and v. for any other use reasonably related to the foregoing purposes. Grantor agrees that no buildings, structures, fences, or other obstructions (collectively “Obstructions”) shall be erected, placed, or maintained within the Permanent Easement Areas. This 2 prohibition ensures that the Permanent Easement Areas remain clear and accessible for its intended use, including, but not limited to the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement of the Sidewalk Improvements. Grantee has the right, but not the obligation, in its sole discretion, to remove any Obstructions erected or placed within the Permanent Easement Areas by Grantor or otherwise. Grantor also agrees not to alter the grade or surface of the Permanent Easement Areas without the prior written consent from Grantee, which consent may be withheld in the reasonable discretion of Grantee. Grantor also hereby expressly grants, conveys and declares unto and in favor of Grantee the Temporary Driveway Easement on, over, upon, across, under and through the portions of the Property being more particularly described in EXHIBIT “A-1” attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference and being more particularly described and shown with crosshatching in the Acquisition Plat attached as EXHIBIT “B” hereto (as described and shown, the “Temporary Driveway Easement Areas,” together with the Permanent Easement Areas, collectively, the “Easement Areas”), for all purposes as may be deemed necessary, incidental or convenient, in Grantee’s sole discretion, to reconstruct the driveways located within the Temporary Driveway Easement Areas. The Temporary Driveway Easement shall expire upon completion of initial construction of the Project by Grantee. Grantor also hereby expressly grants unto Grantee all rights and privileges necessary, incidental or convenient for the full use and enjoyment of the Easements and the Easement Areas for the purposes described herein, including, without limitation, the right, permission and authority to enter in a reasonable manner upon such portions of the Property lying outside of the Easement Areas for the sole purpose of providing ingress to and egress from the Easement Areas. The conveyance of the Easements herein is subject to all matters of record including, without limitation, that certain Intergovernmental Lease Agreement dated March 1, 2021 between Grantor, as Lessor, and Grantee, as Lessee (the “Lease”), as evidenced by that certain Memorandum of Intergovernmental Lease Agreement filed and recorded on May 6, 2021 in Deed Book 18092, Page 290, Henry County, Georgia records, as the same may be amended or modified. The aforementioned Lease shall not merge with the title to the Easements and shall remain in full force. The Easements, rights and obligations established herein shall run with the title of the Property and shall be binding upon Grantor and inure to the benefit of Grantee, and their respective successors, successors in office and assigns. This Declaration shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Georgia. Any legal action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Declaration shall be brought exclusively in the courts of Henry County, Georgia. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] [REMAINDER OF THE PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor herein has hereunto set hand and seal, the day and year first above written. GRANTOR: STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic of the State of Georgia Signed, Sealed and Delivered in the presence of: ______________________________________ Unofficial Witness Print Name: ____________________________ By: __________________________(SEAL) Name: Title: Chairman Attest: ____________________________ Name: Title: Secretary ______________________________________ Notary Public My Commission Expires: [AFFIX NOTARIAL SEAL] [SIGNATURE PAGE - DECLARATION OF PERMANENT SIDEWALK EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT] 4 EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PERMANENT EASEMENT AREAS PERMANENT EASEMENT AREA #1: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES), SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD, NORTH 30 DEGREES 20 MINUTES 07 SECONDS WEST, 20.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 47 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 28 SECONDS EAST, 6.62 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 35 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 05 SECONDS EAST, 25.72 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 69 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 34 SECONDS EAST, 30.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 75 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 62.96 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 58 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 10 SECONDS EAST, 22.45 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS WEST, 29.41 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS WEST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS WEST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, 43.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 0.03 ACRES (1,218 SQUARE FEET). PERMANENT EASEMENT AREA #2: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD, SOUTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 43.50 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST, 101.72 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 95.22 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 14 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, 3.82 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 75 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 15 SECONDS EAST, 35.22 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 74 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 14 SECONDS EAST, 30.65 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 55 MINUTES 59 SECONDS EAST, 37.10 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 84 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST, 57.76 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 10 DEGREES 06 MINUTES 16 SECONDS WEST, 7.75 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 84.83 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.19 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING NORTH 77 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST, 84.82 FEET) TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 76 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 13 SECONDS WEST, 75.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 0.01 ACRES (581 SQUARE FEET). PERMANENT EASEMENT AREA #3: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD, SOUTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 43.50 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST, 101.72 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 95.22 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST, 75.95 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, 84.83 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.19 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 77 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 84.82 FEET) TO A POINT; THENCE, 40.55 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 80 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 50 SECONDS EAST, 40.55 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 08 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 36 SECONDS EAST, 20.02 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 38 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 22 SECONDS EAST, 10.73 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 80 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 23 SECONDS EAST, 10.29 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 12 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST, 15.85 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 16.62 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING NORTH 81 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST, 16.62 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 0.01 ACRES (259 SQUARE FEET). EXHIBIT “A-1” LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AREAS TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AREA #1: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD, SOUTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 43.50 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST, 101.72 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 84 DEGREES 32 MINUTES 18 SECONDS EAST, 24.23 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 53 DEGREES 25 MINUTES 05 SECONDS EAST, 18.61 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 17 SECONDS EAST, 28.51 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 48 SECONDS EAST, 17.21 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 11 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 18 SECONDS EAST, 16.56 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 50 DEGREES 37 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST, 8.65 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 14 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST, 3.82 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 76 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 45 SECONDS WEST, 95.22 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 0.03 ACRES (1,444 SQUARE FEET). TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AREA #2 ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD, SOUTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 43.50 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST, 101.72 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 95.22 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST, 75.95 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, 84.83 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.19 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 77 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 84.82 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 10 DEGREES 06 MINUTES 16 SECONDS EAST, 7.75 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 28 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 46 SECONDS EAST, 15.44 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 88 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 28.74 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 38 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 22 SECONDS EAST, 9.17 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 08 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 36 SECONDS WEST, 20.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 40.55 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING NORTH 80 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 50 SECONDS WEST, 40.55 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 0.02 ACRES (930 SQUARE FEET). TEMPORARY DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AREA #3: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN LAND LOT 31, 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A CONCRETE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST ATLANTA ROAD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD (RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD, SOUTH 59 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 43.50 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST, 52.97 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST, 4.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST, 101.72 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 95.22 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 76 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST, 75.95 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, 84.83 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.19 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 77 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST, 84.82 FEET) TO A POINT; THENCE, 40.55 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 80 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 50 SECONDS EAST, 40.55 FEET) TO A POINT; THENCE, 16.62 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 81 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 40 SECONDS EAST, 16.62 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 12 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, 15.85 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 67 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 19 SECONDS EAST, 5.86 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, NORTH 26 DEGREES 54 MINUTES 06 SECONDS EAST, 7.59 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE, SOUTH 05 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 22 SECONDS WEST, 25.93 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 9.99 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT (SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,387.39 FEET AND A CHORD BEARING NORTH 82 DEGREES 18 MINUTES 38 SECONDS WEST, 9.99 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OR PARCEL CONTAINING 168 SQUARE FEET. EXHIBIT “B” THE ACQUISITION PLAT N47°39'28"E, ICV6.62' 18 "R ADES ROVARI ST -OF EAIGHT TA TH AN WID L Y AT-WA R CP EE 809 P.O.B. HHPERM #1 N76°08'35"W, 52.97' G NORTH HENRY BOULEVARD AKA U.S. 23 S.R. 138 RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES S76°14'24"E 72.31' S58°30'10"E, 22.45' TEMP #1 P.O.B. N84°32'18"E, 24.23' 12+00 N76°14'24"W, 29.41' DRIVEWAY ESMT AREA #1 S00°03'58"W, 4.40' S75°24'33"E, 62.96' S76°17'17"E, 28.51' N53°25'05"E, 18.61' N/F STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY TAX ID S26-02027000 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD DB 18093, PG 311 13+00 N76°13'45"W, 95.22' SLOPE ESMT AREA #2 PERM #2 P.O.B. 14+00 OR DIAL 811 1 (800) 282-7411 THROUGHOUT GEORGIA UTILITIES PROTECTION CENTER Call before you dig. Know what's below. REVISIONS R 6/4/25 COA# LSF 000995 P:\Projects\City of Stockbridge\013.067 Sidewalk Modifications N Henry Blvd (N. Lee Street to East Atlanta Rd.) (TO No. 2024.06)\SURVEY\dwg\N Henry Blvd-EASE-00.dwg, PARCEL 1, justinroberts, Jun 04, 2025 - 1:14:33pm 1 of 1 SHT 6/4/25 1" =40' CAM SH 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID UNLESS IT BEARS THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE OF THE REGISTRANT ACROSS THE REGISTRANT'S SEAL. DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: 15+00 18" RCP 40 FACILITIES AUTHORITY LL 31, DISTRICT 12 HENRY COUNTY, GA REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY LAND LOT N/F OPEN TOP PIPE THE FIRST BAPTI REBAR OF STOCKBRI CRIMP TOP PIPE OVERHEAD POWER LINE TAX ID S26-0 SQUARE FOOT 4566 NORTH H POINT OF BEGINNING DB 964, P REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE RIGHT-OF-WAY TEMP #3 P.O.B. HH DRIVEWAY ESMT AREA #3 N26°54'06"E, 7.59' S05°05'22"W, 25.93' S67°33'19"W, 5.86' S12°12'12"W 15.85' L=16.62 R=1387.39 CH=S81° 45' 40"E CL=16.62 40 LAND PLANNING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAND SURVEYING COA NO. PER 004790 www.fdc-llc.com FALCON DESIGN CONSULTANTS NEWNAN OFFICE 40 GREENWAY CT., STE A NEWNAN, GEORGIA 30265 Ph. (770) 755-7978 CUMMING OFFICE 500 PIRKLE FERRY RD., STE C CUMMING, GEORGIA 30040 Ph. (678) 807-7100 COA NO. LSF 000995 80 STOCKBRIDGE OFFICE 235 CORP. CTR. DR., STE 200 STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA 30281 Ph (770)389-8666 - Fax(770)389-8656 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 40 ft. 20 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 S80°05'23"W, 10.29' L=9.99 R=1387.39 CH=S82° 18' 38"E CL=9.99 S08°45'36"W, 20.02' S38°01'22"E, 10.73' PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES REQUIRED TEMPORARY EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF DRIVEWAYS CIVIL ENGINEERING CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC ACQUISITION PLAT FOR: LOCATED IN: PERM #3 P.O.B. SLOPE ESMT AREA #3 L=40.55 R=1387.39 CH=N80° 34' 50"W CL=40.55 TEMP #2 HH P.O.B. S74°14'14"E, S38°01'22"E, 30.65' 9.17' S76°55'59"E, S88°17'45"E, 37.10' 28.74' N28°15'46"E, 15.44' S10°06'16"W, 7.75' S84°04'41"E, 57.76' DRIVEWAY ESMT AREA #2 L=84.83 R=1387.19 CH=S77° 59' 30"E CL=84.82 S76°15'13"E, 75.95' S14°41'12"W, 3.82' S75°03'15"E, 35.22' S50°37'25"E, 8.65' S11°13'18"E, 16.56' S76°59'48"E, 17.21' LL OTP RB CTP -Esq ft POB RCP R/W 18" RCP FALCON DESIGN CONSULTANTS, LLC. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. ANY POSSESSION, REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE OF THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM FALCON DESIGN CONSULTANTS, LLC. IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. N59°39'30"W, 43.50' N30°20'07"W, 20.38' HH 18 E E P " RC 11+00 S35°17'05"E, 25.72' S69°03'34"E, 30.00' 10 + 0 0 TH OR SLOPE ESMT AREA #1 ID N 16+00 GR 18" RCP