---
date: 2026-03-09
title: Regular Council Meetings Agenda Packet
source: 2026-03/2026-03-09_Regular Council Meetings_Agenda Packet.pdf
pages: 1
---

STOCKBRIDGE Council Meeting
CITY COUNCIL Agenda
Mayor Jayden L. Williams
March 9, 2026 6:00 PM
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

CITY MANAGER STOCKBRIDGE CITY HALL
Shawn Edmondson
4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD.
INTERIM CITY CLERK
STOCKBRIDGE, GA 30281
Cassandra Lester

CITY TREASURER Website: www.stockbridgega.org
Frank Milazi Phone: 770-389-7900
CITY ATTORNEY
Fax: 770-389-7912
Quinton G. Washington
Translation and Interpretation Services are available with (7)
Megan McCulloch
days prior notice. Please contact the City’s HR Manager at
770-389-7908 for assistance.
AGENDA
COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2026 6:00 PM

CALL TO ORDER

INVOCATION

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
1 Adoption of the February 24th 2026 Work Session Meeting Minutes

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.

CEREMONIAL
2 Presentation of the Adopt-a-Road sign and proclamation for the Zeta Mu Nu
Chapter of Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc.

CONSENT AGENDA
3 Confirmation of the Economic Development Director
4 Confirmation of the Chief of Police

OLD BUSINESS
5 Council consideration to approve the Norfolk Southern Lease Agreement.
- Presented by: Megan McCulloch, Shawn Edmondson

PUBLIC HEARING
Page | 3

6 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (C.I.E.) FOR 2026. (Citywide)
Consideration of a resolution to adopt the updated Capital Improvement
Elements for 2026 in support of the City’s required submittal to the Georgia
Department of Community Affairs (DCA), ensuring continued compliance with
state impact fee and comprehensive planning requirements. This adoption is
presented as a standalone City of Stockbridge Capital Improvement Element,
separate from the Henry County CIE, to accurately reflect the City’s
independent service delivery, capital project needs, and growth projections.
- Presented by: Ryan Anderson
7 STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE
STREET. (Council District 4)
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 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
8 DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-01 FOR THE MANDERLEY
SUBDIVISION, PHASE 9. (Council District 1)
Consideration of an Ordinance to de-annex from the Stockbridge City Limits
two parcels within the Manderley Subdivision, representing Phase 9. The
request was made by the owners of the two parcels. The Henry County Board
of Commissioners adopted a resolution on January 20, 2026 to consent to the
de-annexation and allow the parcels to become a part of unincorporated Henry
County. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson
9 DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-02 FOR THE MANDERLEY
SUBDIVISION, PHASE 10. (Council District 1)
Consideration of an Ordinance to de-annex from the Stockbridge City Limits six
(6) parcels within the Manderley Subdivision, representing Phase 10. The
request was made by the owners of the six parcels. The Henry County Board
of Commissioners adopted a resolution on January 20, 2026 to consent to the
de-annexation and allow the parcels to become a part of unincorporated Henry
County. - Presented by: Ryan Anderson

MAYOR'S COMMENTS (Mayor 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

March 9, 2026 6:00 PM 4640 N. Henry Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
Page | 4

discriminate based on disability. Individuals requiring auxiliary services for
meeting participation should contact City Hall at 770-389-7900 in advance.

ADJOURNMENT

March 9, 2026 6:00 PM 4640 N. Henry Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 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 Williams at 6:00 p.m.

Invocation was led by Councilmember Berry.

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all in attendance.

Interim City Clerk Lester conducted the roll call. A quorum was established. Councilmember
LaKeisha Gantt arrived during Executive Session at 7:04 p.m.

Motion to adopt the agenda with the amendment of item number two regarding the Norfolk
Southern Lease Agreement be tabled until the March 9th meeting was made by
Councilmember Berry; Seconded by Councilmember Barber. The motion passed
unanimously 4-0.

Mayor Williams noted that the city attorney had requested the amendment to allow more
time for review.

Mayor Pro Tem Alexander motioned to amend the agenda to add the Lee Street name
change as a voting item but withdrew his motion after Community Development Director
Ryan Anderson clarified that the item was scheduled for March 9th due to required public
hearing notification procedures. Mr. Anderson explained that notifications had been sent to

1|Page
16 affected property owners and advertisements placed in the Henry Herald with the
required 15-day waiting period.

Motion to approve the February 9, 2026 City Council Summary Minutes was made by
Mayor Pro Tem Alexander; Seconded by Councilmember Berry. The motion passed
unanimously 4-0.

There were three public comments. Residents from Duval Drive addressed concerns about
the Rock Quarry Road Extension project.

Jack Pope Jr. of 115 Duval stated that he had received materials on his mailbox showing a
proposed route through his street, noting that Duval had been a dead-end street for over 50
years. He expressed concern that this was the first time residents had seen or heard of
such a plan.

Donna Barge of 122 Duval Drive questioned whether the Rock Quarry extension would
come down Duval Drive, expressing confusion about the project plans and seeking
clarification on what was being proposed.

Mark Dobbs of 119 Duval Drive, a 50-year resident, emphasized that Duval Drive is a
narrow street where the double yellow line doesn't extend the full length. He expressed
concerns about quality of life impacts and noted that over the 25 years the Rock Quarry
Road extension had been discussed, it was always planned to go past city property to meet
Valley Hill Road, not through Duval Drive. Dobbs questioned why residents received only
two hours' notice before the meeting and worried about impacts on small children in the
neighborhood and property transactions in progress.

Councilmember Barber assured the residents that their concerns would be addressed
during the Rock Quarry Road Extension agenda item later in the meeting.

EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion to enter executive session for real estate, personnel, cyber security, and litigation
was made by Councilmember Berry, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander.

Discussion: Councilmember Barber pointed out that executive session is usually held at the
end of the meeting. Since several homeowners on Duval Drive have spoken about the
notification they received, she proposed moving the executive session back to the end of
the agenda to address their concerns.

Councilmember Berry rescinded his motion to adjourn into executive session.

Discussion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander asked clarification as to why executive session was
moved to the top of the meeting. Clarification was given by City Attorney Washington that it
was to meet with the real estate attorney.

Motion to move executive session to right above mayor's comments after new business was
made by Councilmember Berry; seconded by Councilmember Barber. The motion passed
unanimously 4-0.

NEW BUSINESS
Council consideration to approve the Norfolk Southern Lease Agreement.
This item was tabled until the March 9th meeting as noted in the agenda adoption.
2|Page
Council consideration to approve Task Order No. 2025.16 with Falcon — Preliminary
Design – Rock Quarry Road Extension.
Public Works Director Decius Aaron introduced the item, stating that previously when they
discussed the Rock Quarry Road extension, there were several options, but city council was
adamant about not disrupting any families or homes. Mr. Aaron confirmed that "the
preferred route is from North Henry Boulevard terminating at Old Conyers Road. That is the
route that council agreed on and that's the route that we will be pursuing. It will not go down
Duval Drive. It would go to Old Conyers Road."

Alexander asked several times as to how this item made it on the agenda prior to the
Planning Retreat. Mayor Pro Tem Alexander also expressed concern that someone had put
out misinformation but clarified that no one from the city put anything on citizens’ doors.

Mr. Aaron explained that this was one of the TSPLOST projects with existing funding,
describing it as "low hanging fruit" to create a shovel-ready project for future federal, state,
and other funding opportunities. He also clarified that Mr. Price was asked to return to
present the routes and concepts discussed in a previous meeting.

Alexander further asked does the city have the money to complete the project citing that it’s
going to cost between $40 to $50 million dollars. To which Mr. Aaron stated although we do
not have the money for the project now, this item is for the preliminary plans and design
which will allow for any future projects to secure funding in which to build the road.

Councilmember Berry commented that during a city council meeting in November or
December 2025, they tasked Falcon Design with coming back to present certain information
within 60 to 90 days. He assumes that this is the follow-up to that request. He clarified that
the city council is not making a decision or allocating funding; rather, they are looking for a
concept of the layout or plan that outlines potential routes they could take.

Adam Price managing partner with Falcon Design presented the preliminary engineering
proposal, explaining that they were showing only the route to Old Conyers Road, because
the Duval route had been eliminated after council said they did not want that route. Price
described crossing a creek (unidentified) with a large floodplain, noting "there's a potential
that we might have to do a bridge to cross this. And of course that can be very expensive,
but I don't know that until I get through preliminary engineering."

Mr. Price then showed the proposed route on screen, explaining, "Just to share with the
Duval residents. That route was eliminated. Council said they did not want to go that route.
So from what you see here is just a route to Old Conyers." Price emphasized that the Duval
option had been completely eliminated: "The Duvall option is not on the table and not going
to be analyzed. Just so everybody knows."

Price outlined the engineering challenges, particularly focusing on the creek crossing. He
mentioned that a proposal is needed to advance to preliminary engineering in order to gain
a clearer understanding of potential costs. “As I noted several months ago, crossing this
creek—indicated by my arrow—presents a significant challenge due to the large floodplain
surrounding it. The dark lines mark the floodplain, and the stream is visible as well. It is
possible that we may need to construct a bridge to span this creek, which could be quite
expensive. However, I won't have a definitive cost estimate until we complete the
preliminary engineering phase.”

3|Page
He explained that the preliminary engineering phase would provide better cost estimates:
"And at that point, this is what this proposal does. It gets you to the point where, hey, I got a
really good idea of what this is going to cost now. And then if the council at that point says,
hey, okay, we want finished shovel ready plans that I can take it to final engineering and be
done."

Councilmember Alexander asked about preliminary cost estimates, and Price
acknowledged they had been "spitballing" previously with figures around $40 million, but
noted: "when you're talking about a bridge, that's millions of dollars right there. If you don't
have to do a bridge, it can save you millions."

Alexander expressed his view on timing and property acquisition. Price confirmed that is
part of the preliminary engineering stage.

Alexander then discussed potential phased implementation, mentioning the new Tim
Hortons development and asking about building the first section to provide access to the
amphitheater and mixed-use development. Community Development Director Ryan
Anderson confirmed there was an approved plan for 33 units of townhomes and single
family residences behind the Tim Hortons location.

Alexander emphasized that the Duval Drive route has never been a preferred route and
clarified that the project's objective is to provide a bypass to alleviate traffic on East Atlanta
Road.

Regarding timeline, Price estimated that even with funding available immediately, "you
probably wouldn't be able to start construction on this probably for upwards of 2 years. And
that's in a perfect scenario."

Alexander wanted clarification that no city staff had distributed information to residents,
asking city staff, “Did anybody from the city put anything on these folks' doors? Anybody
from the city?" Both Ryan Anderson and Decius Aaron confirmed no city personnel had
done so.

Councilmember Barber then spoke extensively in support of the project. “I've been
advocating for this project to move forward for at least 3 years." She explained, "It's in the
district that I represent. These homeowners hold me accountable for their quality of life."

Barber detailed the impact of the amphitheater, citing that it brings thousands of people to
the downtown area, and the homeowners are affected by it. stating "So, absolutely, I
support anything that's going to provide some relief, traffic relief to homeowners who live in
the area."

Barber expressed strong support for moving forward: "I know this task order before us is for
the design phase of $167,900. I absolutely support moving forward with the final design."
She asked about the timeline and requested that Aaron and Price bring a completion
timeline if the task order was approved to the city’s planning retreat.

Price clarified the scope and cost, stating, "This estimate is only for the preliminary design,
which will help us determine the overall cost. The final design will include the bridge and
other elements. I opted not to include the final design in this estimate because we want to
first assess whether a bridge is necessary.

4|Page
Our goal is to design without a bridge, but if needed, we will include it. The total cost should
not exceed 25 percent of your budget and will be well below $2 million."

Barber concluded by noting the potential for federal and state funding if the designs are
completed.

Councilmember Berry emphasized the need for a phased implementation of the project:
"This project needs to be carried out in phases. It won't be an overnight situation." He
mentioned that this plan was created based on the original agreement everyone reached.
However, we also need to take a step back and recognize that we can approach it in
phases. We can tackle sections of the project as we secure funding, but it's essential to
plan for these phases first.”

Alexander reiterated his support for the project, noting he had worked with former City
Manager Knighton to put this project in the T-SPLOST. However, he preferred discussing it
thoroughly at the upcoming retreat where they would have hours to talk about it in detail
rather than the limited time that evening.

Motion to approve Task Order Number 2025.16 for Falcon Design for the preliminary design
of Rock Quarry Road Extension in the amount of $167,900 was made by Councilmember
Barber; seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander.

Discussion: Mayor Pro Tem Alexander stated that there is $2 million dollars set aside and
hopefully some of the funding can be used for other projects such as improving a street
section at Ceresa Drive.

The motion passed unanimously 4-0.

Council consideration authorizing the City Treasurer/CFO to make arrangements to
reimburse Henry County in reference to TSPLOST.

City Treasurer/CFO Frank Milazi explained that in 2021, following the TSPLOST passage,
the City of Stockbridge committed through Resolution 21-233 to contribute $4 million toward
Rock Quarry Road widening construction costs. Henry County had begun construction and
requested fulfillment of this obligation.

Milazi recommended a payment schedule of $2 million in 2026, $1 million in 2027, and the
final $1 million at project completion in 2028. This timeline aligned with the county's
projected 2.5-year construction schedule.

Councilmember Barber clarified that this Rock Quarry Road Widening project, which
terminates at North Henry Boulevard, is different from the Rock Quarry Road Extension
project that was just previously discussed in the meeting.

Mayor Pro Tem Alexander explained that voter approval of the one-cent sales tax enabled
the Rock Quarry Road widening project. He clarified that Stockbridge's $4 million
contribution combined with Henry County's $30 million investment and GDOT funding would
create a four-lane road from Eagles Landing Parkway to North Henry Boulevard.
The project would include a 10-foot multi-use path on one side, a 5-foot sidewalk on the
other, beautification, and new street lighting and further compared the multi-use path to the
Atlanta Beltline.

5|Page
Alexander emphasized that the current TSPLOST would expire at year's end, with voters
deciding whether to approve continuation. He noted that future transportation
improvements, including projects like Duval Drive paving, would depend on TSPLOST
renewal approval.

Mayor Williams mentioned that he, Councilmember Cloud, and Mayor Pro Tem Alexander
had recently toured GDOT projects with staff, and the Rock Quarry expansion would be a
prime example displayed across the state.

Motion to approve authorization of the City Treasurer/CFO to make arrangements to
reimburse Henry County in reference to the TSPLOST project for the Rock Quarry Road
widening in the amounts of $2 million in 2026, $1 million in 2027, and the last million at the
conclusion of the project in 2028 was made by Councilmember Berry; seconded by
Councilmember Cloud. The motion passed unanimously 4-0

EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion to enter executive session for real estate, personnel, cyber security, and litigation
was made by Mayor Pro Tem Alexander, seconded by Councilmember Berry.
The motion passed unanimously 4-0.

Motion to end executive session and return to regular scheduled work session was made by
Mayor Pro Tem Alexander, seconded by Councilmember Berry.
The motion passed unanimously 5-0.

There was no announcement from executive session.

MAYOR'S COMMENTS (Mayor Jayden L. Williams)
Mayor Williams announced upcoming events, including the Women's History Month event
on Sunday at Merle Manders Conference Center, and directed residents to follow the city's
social media and website for updates.

ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING MEETINGS & EVENTS
Councilmember Berry announced a Clergy Roundtable meeting for Monday, March 2nd at
6:30 PM in the Levi Room at City Hall.

ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:14 p.m. was made by Mayor Williams, seconded by
Councilmember Berry. The motion passed unanimously 5-0

Respectfully submitted by:

Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk Jayden L. Williams, Mayor

6|Page
March 9, 2026

Decius T. Aaron

Public Works

The Zeta Mu Nu Chapter of the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. has adopted Martin Luther King, Sr. Heritage Trail and
have completed the program requirements.

The Adopt-A-Road Program was established for the City of Stockbridge community and civic organizations, citizens,
and private businesses to contribute toward the effort of maintaining cleaner and more beautiful roads. The
organization commits to pick up litter and remove illegal signs once per quarter (4 times a year or more if necessary)
along its section of roadway and promote a better environment in the community.

The Adopt-A-Road Program was established for the City of Stockbridge community and civic organizations, citizens,
and private businesses to contribute toward the effort of maintaining cleaner and more beautiful roads. The organization
commits to pick up litter and remove illegal signs once per quarter (4 times a year or more if necessary) along its
section of roadway and promote a better environment in the community.

Public Works recommend approval.
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF HENRY
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE

RESOLUTION NO. R26-____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE,
GEORGIA APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH NORFOLK SOUTHERN FOR
A PARKING LOT PROJECT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge ("City") is a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Georgia and is charged with being fiscally responsible
concerning the use and expenditure of all public funds; and

WHEREAS, the City finds a need for additional parking in the downtown area of the Main Street
District for existing and future merchants, overflow parking for the Stockbridge Amphitheater,
related City events, and to help further beautify the physical attributes of downtown Stockbridge;
and

WHEREAS, the Economic Development Department seeks Council approval to enter a ten (10)
year lease agreement with Norfolk Southern for a parking lot, as detailed in Exhibit A in the
amount of $15,000 annually; and

WHEREAS, Mayor and City Council find that approval of the Lease Agreement for the use of
the property as a public parking lot will enhance public access, support economic activity, and
serve the public interest.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT.

Council hereby approves the lease agreement with Norfolk Southern, as detailed in the attached
Exhibit A, for use of a parking lot near the intersection of Martin Luther King Sr. Heritage Trail
and Love Street for a period of ten (10) years at the annual cost of $15,000.

The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute said lease agreement with Norfolk Southern.

SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLEMENTATION.

The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute all necessary actions consistent
with this Resolution.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.

If any part of this resolution is adjudged invalid, such judgment shall not affect the remainder of
this resolution.

SECTION 4. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.

All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 5. CITY ATTORNEY’S AUTHORITY.

Pursuant to the City's charter and with explicit consent of the City Council, the City Attorney is
duly authorized to make requisite amendments to all contracts, ordinances, resolutions, and
documents, as may be necessary, in order to secure conformity with the express intent of the City
Council and to ensure adherence to all pertinent laws and ordinances of the City.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.

RESOLVED this 24th day of February, 2026.

Jayden Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:

Cassandra Lester, Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Quinton G. Washington, City Attorney
MARCH 9, 2026

Ryan Anderson

Community Development

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (C.I.E.) FOR 2026. Consideration of a resolution to adopt the updated Capital
Improvement Element (CIE) for 2026 in support of the City’s required submittal to the Georgia Department of
Community Affairs (DCA), ensuring continued compliance with state impact fee and comprehensive planning
requirements. This adoption is presented as a standalone CIE, separate from the Henry County CIE, to accurately
reflect the City’s independent service delivery, capital project needs, and growth projections.

The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) is a required component of the Comprehensive Plan that identifies the City’s
long term capital facility needs, including transportation, public safety, parks, utilities, and cultural facilities and provides
a multi-year schedule of improvements needed to maintain adopted levels of service as growth occurs.

$0.00
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (C.I.E.) FOR 2026

Approval and Adoption.
STATE OF GEORGIA
HENRY COUNTY
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA,
REQUESTING AND APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ESTABLISH A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (CIE)
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE; PROVIDING THAT SUCH CITY CIE SHALL
SUPERSEDE PRIOR RELIANCE ON THE HENRY COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
ELEMENT; AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL TO THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS AND THE ATLANTA REGIONAL COMMISSION; 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; an

WHEREAS, the Georgia Development Impact Fee Act (“DIFA”), O.C.G.A. § 36-71-1 et seq.,
authorizes municipalities to plan for and finance system improvements serving new
development and provides that a local government may impose development impact fees
only pursuant to, and consistent with, a duly adopted Capital Improvements Element
within its comprehensive plan; and

WHEREAS, the Georgia Department of Community Affairs (“DCA”) has adopted rules titled
“Development Impact Fee Compliance Requirements,” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 110-12-2,
which specify that a local government intending to implement or maintain an impact fee
program must adopt a CIE and keep it current through annual updates that include a
five-year schedule of system improvements and the annual financial report required by
DIFA; and

WHEREAS, DCA’s Minimum Standards and Procedures for Local Comprehensive Planning
(Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 110-12-1) establish the framework for preparing and amending local
comprehensive plans, including elements and updates that ensure consistency and
Qualified Local Government (QLG) status; and
WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge has adopted and maintains a Comprehensive Plan and
periodically updates it to remain in compliance with state planning requirements and to
guide local growth, investment, and capital planning; and

WHEREAS, the City has historically coordinated capital planning in the context of
countywide planning frameworks and now desires to deviate from the historic Henry
County capital improvements framework and establish a City-specific CIE that reflects
Stockbridge’s service areas, levels of service, capital priorities, and anticipated funding
sources within the municipal limits;

WHEREAS, adopting a City-specific CIE will improve transparency and accountability for
capital facilities needed to serve Stockbridge residents and businesses and will align
impact fee–eligible system improvements with the City’s established service levels, project
schedules, and funding strategy as required under DIFA and DCA rules; and

WHEREAS, the City recognizes that, prior to final adoption, a CIE (and any amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan to establish or replace a CIE) must be transmitted to the
appropriate Regional Commission and to DCA for review, and that public hearing(s) and a
transmittal resolution are standard parts of this process under DIFA/DCA procedures;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA, AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Adoption of City-Specific CIE (Policy Direction). The Mayor and Council hereby
declare the policy intent to adopt an amendment to the City of Stockbridge Comprehensive
Plan to establish a Capital Improvements Element (CIE) specific to the City of Stockbridge.
Upon final adoption, this City CIE shall supersede any prior reliance by the City on Henry
County’s Capital Improvements Element for purposes of municipal capital planning and
impact fee compliance within the City limits.

SECTION 2. Scope and Content of the City CIE. The City CIE shall (a) identify projected
needs for system improvements during the planning horizon, (b) include a schedule of
capital improvements to meet those needs, and (c) describe anticipated funding sources
(including, as applicable, development impact fees) for each required improvement,
consistent with DIFA and DCA rules.

SECTION 3. Public Hearing and Transmittal. City staff is authorized and directed to (a)
notice and conduct the required public hearing(s) on the draft City CIE, and (b) transmit the
draft City CIE and accompanying materials to the Atlanta Regional Commission and to
DCA for review, in accordance with DIFA and the DCA Development Impact Fee
Compliance Requirements.
SECTION 4. Final Adoption. Following completion of regional and state review, and after
consideration of any review comments, the Mayor and Council shall place the City CIE for
final adoption at a duly noticed public meeting by resolution/ordinance, and, upon
adoption, the City shall maintain the CIE through annual updates that include a current
five-year schedule of improvements and the annual financial report on impact fees as
required by law.

SECTION 5. Administrative Implementation. The City Manager (or designee) is authorized
to take all actions necessary to implement this Resolution, including coordination with
consultants, preparation of the draft CIE content (service areas, levels of service, project
lists, schedules, and funding plans), and preparation of related impact fee documentation
consistent with DIFA and DCA guidance

SECTION 4. Severability. In the event that any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this Ordinance is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall in no manner affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance, 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 Ordinance.

SECTION 5. Approval of Execution. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign all documents
necessary to effectuate this Ordinance.

SECTION 6. Attestation. The City Clerk is authorized to execute, attest to, and seal any
documents which may be necessary to effectuate this ordinance, subject to approval as to
form by the City Attorney.

SECTION 7. Repeal of Conflicting Provision. Except as otherwise provided herein, all
ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed.

SECTION 8. Authority to Amend. The City Attorney is granted the authority to amend or
correct this ordinance, with the express consent of the City Council, to reflect the intent of
the Council and to ensure compliance with applicable laws.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption.

RESOLVED this 9th day of March, 2026.

Jayden Williams, MAYOR
ATTEST:

Cassandra Lester, INTERIM CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Quinton Washington, CITY ATTORNEY

Capital
Improvement
Element, 2026

City of Stockbridge
Impact Fee Program, 2026

4640 North Henry Blvd
Stockbridge, GA 30281
www.stockbridgega.org

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT, 2026
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary............................................................................3

Introduction.......................................................................................5

Parks and Recreation.......................................................................16

Parks................................................................................................16

Trails................................................................................................23

Water...............................................................................................34

Sewer...............................................................................................48

Stormwater......................................................................................49

Cultural Facilities..............................................................................58

Roads................................................................................................68

Public Safety.....................................................................................84

Short Term Work Program ................................................................93

Annual Financial Report....................................................................98

Conclusion.........................................................................................98

Glossary.............................................................................................99

Appendix A.......................................................................................100

Appendix B.......................................................................................104

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Stockbridge Capital Improvement Element (CIE) serves as a strategic framework for
planning, funding, and implementing priority capital projects that sustain quality of life and
support long-term growth. This report integrates comprehensive planning with fiscal
responsibility through two key mechanisms: the Capital Improvements Element and
Development Impact Fees.

Purpose and Scope
The CIE translates the City’s vision into a multi-year schedule of improvements for public
facilities, transportation, water and sewer systems, parks, public safety, and cultural amenities.
It ensures that infrastructure investments keep pace with growth while maintaining adopted
service levels. Development impact fees complement this process by allocating a fair share of
costs to new development, protecting existing residents from subsidizing growth-related needs.

Key Components

• Capital Improvements Element: Provides a transparent, data-driven basis for capital
budgeting, interdepartmental coordination, and accountability.

• Impact Fee Program: Authorized under Georgia’s Development Impact Fee Act (O.C.G.A.
§36-71-1 et seq.), ensuring lawful, proportionate cost recovery for growth-related
infrastructure.

• Eligible Facilities: Public safety, parks and recreation, transportation, water and sewer
systems, and cultural facilities.

Growth Forecasts and Service Levels
Population is projected to increase by 53.9% (to 56,647 residents) by 2050, with housing units
growing 54.8% and employment rising 63.7%. These trends drive demand for expanded
infrastructure:

• Parks & Recreation: Current inventory (63.99 acres) exceeds LOS standard; future needs
focus on facility enhancements, not land acquisition.

• Trail System: Significant shortfall; 33.5 additional miles required to meet LOS standard
of 0.65 miles per 1,000 residents.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

• Water System: Growth will add 1.74 MGD of demand, requiring capacity-expanding
improvements.

• Public Safety: Additional 10,407 sq. ft. of facility space and one specialized vehicle
needed to maintain service levels.

Capital Projects and Costs
The report identifies growth-related projects across all service categories, including new trail
construction, park enhancements, water system upgrades, and public safety facilities. Impact
fee eligibility is calculated based on proportionality and LOS standards, ensuring compliance
with state law.

Fiscal Sustainability and Accountability
By linking planning, finance, and growth management, the CIE and impact fee program provide
a disciplined approach to capital investment. Annual updates and financial reporting maintain
transparency and ensure alignment with development trends and fiscal conditions.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

INTRODUCTION

The City’s long-term prosperity and quality of life depend on dependable public facilities,
transportation networks, water and sewer systems, parks, public safety facilities, and cultural
and recreational venues that keep pace with growth and evolving community needs. This
report sets out the purpose, scope, and policy framework for the Capital Improvements
Element (CIE) and development impact fees, two essential tools that link comprehensive
planning to responsible investment.

Capital Improvements Element (CIE).
The CIE is the City’s strategic plan for funding and delivering priority capital projects over a
defined multi-year horizon. It translates the community vision and goals of the Comprehensive
Plan into a fiscally constrained schedule of improvements, identifying projects, estimated costs,
funding sources, implementation timelines, and levels of service to be maintained. By aligning
needs, resources, and timing, the CIE provides:

• A transparent, data-driven basis for capital budgeting and annual work programs.

• A framework to coordinate interdepartmental priorities and leverage grants and
partnerships.

• A mechanism to maintain adopted levels of service and address system deficiencies,
growth-driven demands, and lifecycle asset renewal.

• Accountability to residents through public reporting on planned and completed
improvements.

Development Impact Fees
Development impact fees are a growth management and financing tool that allow the City to
equitably recover a proportionate share of the capital costs of expanding public facilities
necessitated by new development. When calculated and administered according to statutory
and professional standards, impact fees:

• Allocate costs fairly so that new growth contributes its share of capacity expansions.

• Protect existing residents from subsidizing growth-related capital needs.

• Support concurrency and level-of-service commitments by ensuring funding is available
when capacity is needed.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

• Enhance fiscal sustainability by diversifying revenue sources for eligible capital
improvements.

The CIE–Impact Fee Connection
The CIE is the backbone of the City’s impact fee program. It documents the eligible facilities,
project lists, cost estimates, and implementation schedules that underpin impact fee
calculations and ensure fees are nexus-based and proportionate. Together, the CIE and impact
fees create a closed loop: the CIE establishes needs and timing; impact fees provide a lawful,
transparent mechanism to fund the growth-related portion of those needs; and annual updates
keep both aligned with actual development trends, project delivery, and fiscal conditions.

Impact Fees Authorization
Development impact fees in Georgia are authorized under O.C.G.A. § 36-71-1 et seq., known as
the Georgia Development Impact Fee Act (DIFA). The program is administered by the Georgia
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) in accordance with Chapter 110-12-2, Development
Impact Fee Compliance Requirements, of the Georgia Administrative Code.

Under DIFA, local governments may impose impact fees on new development to recover its
proportionate share of the cost of providing public facilities necessary to serve growth. This
statutory authority ensures that infrastructure investments keep pace with development while
maintaining fiscal responsibility and protecting existing residents from subsidizing growth-
related costs. To remain in compliance with DIFA and DCA regulations, the City must adopt and
maintain an updated Capital Improvements Element as part of its Comprehensive Plan,
calculate impact fees using approved methodologies that establish a clear nexus between
development and facility needs and provide annual reporting and updates to ensure accuracy
and transparency.

Under the Georgia Development Impact Fee Act (DIFA), local governments may assess impact
fees on new development to recover its proportionate share of the cost of providing public
facilities needed to serve growth. This authority ensures that infrastructure investments keep
pace with development while maintaining fiscal responsibility and preventing existing residents
from subsidizing growth-related costs.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

(Figure 1)

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

Purpose of Impact Fees
Impact fees are designed to allocate the cost of growth fairly and equitably. They provide a
mechanism for new development to contribute to the expansion of public facilities required to
maintain adopted levels of service. Impact fees complement other revenue sources, such as
property and sales taxes, by ensuring that growth pays for growth. This approach reduces the
financial burden on existing residents and businesses while supporting sustainable
development. Eligible facilities include:

• Public Safety Facilities – Police, fire, and emergency services
• Parks and Recreation Facilities – Community parks, trails, and recreational amenities
• Transportation Infrastructure – Roads, intersections, and related improvements
• Water and Sewer Systems – Treatment plants, distribution, and collection systems
• Other Related Capital Improvements – Facilities necessary to support community
growth

Focus of this Report
1. Define the policy basis for the Capital Improvements Element and development impact
fees.

2. Summarize existing levels of service, facility conditions, growth forecasts, and capital
needs.

3. Present the multi-year capital improvement schedule with project descriptions, costs,
and funding sources.

4. Explain impact fee methodologies, including land use assumptions, service areas, cost
allocations, and credits.

5. Outline governance and compliance, including annual update procedures, financial
reporting, and public engagement.

6. Identify near-term actions to implement the capital program, maintain concurrency,
and ensure equitable cost sharing.

By integrating planning, finance, and growth management, the City advances a disciplined,
transparent approach to capital investment—one that supports economic vitality, protects
levels of service, and delivers high-value facilities for residents, businesses, and visitors

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

Categories for Assessment of Impact Fees
The Georgia Development Impact Fee Act (O.C.G.A. §36-71-1 et seq.) authorizes local
governments to assess impact fees for specific public facilities that provide system-wide
benefits and are necessary to maintain adopted levels of service as growth occurs. These
facilities must be identified in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) and comply with the
Georgia Department of Community Affairs’ Development Impact Fee Compliance
Requirements.

Table 1 presented lists the facility categories eligible for impact fee funding under Georgia law
and considered in this report. These categories include:

Each category aligns with statutory requirements and is evaluated in this report for planning,
compliance, and financial analysis. By documenting these eligible facilities, the City ensures that
impact fee revenues are allocated transparently and exclusively for capital improvements that
expand capacity to serve growth, consistent with adopted Level of Service standards.

Table 1 - Overview of Impact Fees - Facilities

Water & Sewer Roads Cultural Parks & Public Safety
Recreation
Facilities

Eligible Facilities Treatment Streets, Cultural Facilities, Parks, trails, Police stations,
plants, intersections, emergency playgrounds, fire stations,
distribution bridges, and communication recreational emergency
systems, and related facilities amenities medical services,
storage, improvements and 911 centers
Collection
systems, disposal
systems

Service Area Citywide Citywide Citywide Citywide Citywide

Level of Service Total Facility Traffic Square feet per Acres of parkland Response time
Capacity / Total Volume/Roadwa capita or number per 1,000 standards or
Demand Units y Capacity of volumes per residents or facility coverage
resident square feet of per population
recreation space
per capita.

Historic Funding Impact Fees and Impact Fees and Impact Fees and Impact Fees and Impact Fees and
Source General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org

Forecasts
To accurately quantify and estimate the prospective demand for services within the City of
Stockbridge, demographic and socioeconomic growth must be considered in future projections.
Such projections consider past and prospective trends in a community’s population, housing
options, and employment opportunities over the next 25 years to 2050. Amalgamated together
for a given year, these projected figures constitute a “day-night population,” a figure that
demonstrates an accurate snapshot of the number of people that depend on municipal 24-hour
services like fire protection. Calculating the difference of the day-night population from 2025 to
2050 provides the City of Stockbridge with a quantifiable estimate that predicts foreseeable
needs and potential expansion opportunities for public safety facilities and resources through
the provision of the proposed impact fee program.

Population Commented [VG1]: Include information about the 2022
annexation @Brennen Reilly
As a community grows, existing infrastructural resources—such as transportation networks,
public safety facilities, and parks—become increasingly strained across various spatiotemporal
distributions that disparage some subregions over others. Population growth trends supply local
governments with quantifiable evidence that projected demand within their jurisdiction will
exceed current capacity, thereby necessitating new or expanded capital facilities that enhance
the equity and quality of municipal services collectively.

Table 2 reveals a transition from steady population growth to temporary stagnation, followed by
rapid expansion and then stabilized higher growth.

Table 2 - Stockbridge Population Growth Trends (2015-2025)
Year Population Estimate Total Change Percent Change
2015 27,461 352 1.30%
2016 27,918 457 1.66%
2017 28,276 358 1.28%
2018 28,617 341 1.21%
2019 28,819 202 0.71%
2020 28,961 142 0.49%
2021 29,103 142 0.49%
2022 29,245 142 0.49%
2023 34,613 5,368 18.36%
2024 35,893 1,280 3.70%
2025 36,807 914 2.55%

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
10

Between 2015 and 2018, population growth was consistent and modest, averaging roughly 1.2–
1.6% annually. In 2019, population growth began to slow significantly, with annual increases
falling to 0.49% between 2020 and 2022. In 2022, the City of Stockbridge experienced a dramatic
population increase of 5,368 residents, representing a 18.36% uptick since the previous year. This
substantial share of total population growth was largely due to a major annexation that occurred
in 2023, as illustrated in Map 1.

Map 1 - Stockbridge City Limit Expansion

(2021-2023)

Table 3 demonstrates the sustainable, consistent growth that the City of Stockbridge expects to
experience from 2025-2050. Each year, the expected population growth is positive, with annual
growth rates ranging from roughly 1.4% to 2.2%. Henry County exhibits similar trends, spanning
from approximately 0.9% to 1.2%. Thus, the population of the City of Stockbridge expects grow
faster than that of Henry County. Notably, the city’s population will occupy a larger percentage
of the county's population with each passing year, with a 2.53% uptick over 25 years. This can be
largely attributed to the rapid urbanization that the city has experienced over the past five years,

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
11

leading to an expansion of economic and residential opportunities for emerging business
professionals.

Table 3 - Population Growth Projections (2025-2050)
Stockbridge Henry County
Year Population Percent Population Percent Population
Estimate Change (S) Estimate Change Proportion (S-H)
(S) (H) (H)
2025 36,807 267,152 13.78%
2026 37,601 2.16% 270,322 1.19% 13.91%
2027 38,395 2.11% 273,492 1.17% 14.04%
2028 39,188 2.07% 276,661 1.16% 14.16%
2029 39,982 2.03% 279,831 1.15% 14.29%
2030 40,775 1.98% 283,000 1.13% 14.41%
2031 41,569 1.95% 286,170 1.12% 14.53%
2032 42,363 1.91% 289,340 1.11% 14.64%
2033 43,156 1.87% 292,509 1.10% 14.75%
2034 43,950 1.84% 295,679 1.08% 14.86%
2035 44,743 1.81% 298,848 1.07% 14.97%
2036 45,537 1.77% 302,018 1.06% 15.08%
2037 46,331 1.74% 305,188 1.05% 15.18%
2038 47,124 1.71% 308,357 1.04% 15.28%
2039 47,918 1.68% 311,527 1.03% 15.38%
2040 48,711 1.66% 314,696 1.02% 15.48%
2041 49,505 1.63% 317,866 1.01% 15.57%
2042 50,299 1.60% 321,036 1.00% 15.67%
2043 51,092 1.58% 324,205 0.99% 15.76%
2044 51,886 1.55% 327,375 0.98% 15.85%
2045 52,679 1.53% 330,544 0.97% 15.94%
2046 53,473 1.51% 333,714 0.96% 16.02%
2047 54,267 1.48% 336,884 0.95% 16.11%
2048 55,060 1.46% 340,053 0.94% 16.19%
2049 55,854 1.44% 343,223 0.93% 16.27%
2050 56,647 1.42% 346,392 0.92% 16.31%
Total 19,840 53.90% 79,240 29.66% 2.53%
Change

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
12

Housing and Employment
The City of Stockbridge’s housing inventory continues to expand in response to continuous
population growth, increasing employment opportunities, and development. As shown in Table
4, housing units are projected to grow from approximately 15,296 units in 2025 to 23,675 units
by 2050, representing a 54.78 percent increase over the 25-year planning horizon. This sustained
residential growth reflects strong market demand, regional economic expansion, and the City’s
active development pipeline, which includes a diverse mix of single-family detached homes,
townhomes, multifamily apartment communities, and mixed-use developments located along
key transportation corridors.

This growth pattern indicates a gradual transition from primarily suburban development to a
more compact and mixed housing supply that supports walkability, efficient service delivery, and
proximity to employment centers. As new residential units are added, demand increases not only
for neighborhood-level infrastructure, but also for citywide systems such as transportation
networks, water and wastewater treatment and distribution facilities, parks and recreation
amenities, and public safety services. Maintaining adopted levels of service across these systems
requires coordinated capital investment that aligns with the pace, location, and intensity of new
development.

Stockbridge Job Growth Projections (2025–2050)

Employment in the City of Stockbridge is projected to grow steadily over the 25-year planning
horizon, increasing from approximately 24,325 jobs in 2025 to more than 39,800 jobs by 2050, a
63.67 percent increase. The most significant growth occurs early in the projection period, with
an 8.64 percent increase between 2025 and 2026, reflecting near-term commercial and
employment development currently in the pipeline. Following the initial surge, annual job growth
stabilizes, gradually declining from just over 2 percent in the late 2020s to approximately 1.42
percent by 2050.

This pattern reflects a maturing local economy in which long-term employment growth remains
consistent but less volatile as available land decreases, and redevelopment becomes a more
prominent driver of job creation. Continued employment expansion will place increasing
demands on transportation infrastructure, water and wastewater systems, and public safety
services—particularly during peak daytime hours—reinforcing the importance of incorporating
employment forecasts into capital improvement planning. These projections support the use of
development impact fees as a mechanism to ensure that growth-related infrastructure needed

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
13

to serve the City’s expanding workforce is funded proportionately and in coordination with
adopted levels of service.

Table 4 - Stockbridge Housing Growth Table 5- Stockbridge Job Growth Projections
Projections (2025-2050) (2025-2050)
Year Number of Housing Percent Year Number Percent
Units Change of Jobs Change
2025 15,296 2025 24,325
2026 15,715 2.74% 2026 26,426 8.64%
2027 16,047 2.11% 2027 26,984 2.11%
2028 16,378 2.06% 2028 27,541 2.07%
2029 16,710 2.03% 2029 28,099 2.03%
2030 17,042 1.99% 2030 28,657 1.98%
2031 17,373 1.94% 2031 29,215 1.95%
2032 17,705 1.91% 2032 29,773 1.91%
2033 18,037 1.88% 2033 30,330 1.87%
2034 18,368 1.84% 2034 30,888 1.84%
2035 18,700 1.81% 2035 31,445 1.80%
2036 19,032 1.78% 2036 32,003 1.77%
2037 19,364 1.74% 2037 32,561 1.74%
2038 19,695 1.71% 2038 33,119 1.71%
2039 20,027 1.69% 2039 33,677 1.68%
2040 20,358 1.65% 2040 34,234 1.65%
2041 20,690 1.63% 2041 34,792 1.63%
2042 21,022 1.60% 2042 35,350 1.60%
2043 21,353 1.57% 2043 35,907 1.58%
2044 21,685 1.55% 2044 36,465 1.55%
2045 22,017 1.53% 2045 37,023 1.53%
2046 22,348 1.50% 2046 37,581 1.51%
2047 22,680 1.49% 2047 38,139 1.48%
2048 23,012 1.46% 2048 38,696 1.46%
2049 23,344 1.44% 2049 39,254 1.44%
2050 23,675 1.42% 2050 39,812 1.42%
Total 8,379 54.78% Total 15,487 63.67%
Change Change

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
14

Table 4 illustrates Stockbridge’s projected housing unit growth from 2025 through 2050, based
on a compounded annual growth model calibrated using recent Census ACS estimates, local
permit activity, and the City’s development pipeline. The projections indicate an increase from
15,296 housing units in 2025 to 23,675 units by 2050 — an addition of 8,379 units, or a 54.78%
increase over the 25-year period. Annual growth rates gradually taper from 2.74% in 2026 to
1.42% by 2050, reflecting a long-term stabilization of the residential market as available land
decreases and redevelopment becomes the dominant source of new housing. These projections
are critical for forecasting future demands on transportation infrastructure, water and
wastewater capacity, public safety
services, and parks and recreation
Table 6- Stockbridge Day-Night Population Change
facilities.
(2025-2050)
Day-Night Population
The day-night population reflects
the maturity, development, and
expansion of the City of
Stockbridge, as expressed in the
summation of the total number of
people, housing units, and jobs
available within the jurisdiction for
a given year. Between 2025 and
2050, the city expects the total
difference in day-night population
to be roughly 43,706. The total
accounts for a sharp uptick in the
number of jobs that the city
expects into 2026, equating to an
approximate 4.34% change. From
there, the yearly increase in day-
night population steadily declines
by roughly 0.02%-0.03% over time,
lowering to 1.42% by 2050. The
resulting figures will greatly aid the
city forecasting prospective demand for public safety operations.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
15

PARKS & RECREATION
Parks
The City of Stockbridge’s parks and recreation system is composed of a combination of active and
passive park facilities designed to serve residents of all ages and activity levels. These
components support organized recreation, informal leisure activities, and community gathering
opportunities, and collectively contribute to the quality of life for City residents.

Park and recreation components include parkland acreage as well as specific recreational
amenities such as athletic fields, courts, playgrounds, trails, and supporting facilities. These
components are evaluated collectively to establish the City’s Level of Service (LOS) and to
determine future capital needs attributable to population growth.

Introduction

The City of Stockbridge provides parks and recreation facilities that support the health, wellness,
and quality of life of its residents. Public parks and recreational amenities are an essential
component of the City’s infrastructure system, offering opportunities for active recreation,
passive enjoyment, and community gathering. Demand for these facilities is driven primarily by
the City’s residential population, as parks and recreation facilities are used predominantly by
residents rather than by employees or visitors.

The City’s parks and recreation system consists of a combination of community parks,
neighborhood parks, open space, and recreational amenities that collectively serve residents
citywide. These facilities accommodate a variety of activities, including organized sports, informal
recreation, walking and exercise, and family-oriented uses. While some facilities may also be used
by nonresidents, such use is incidental and does not materially affect overall demand for parks
and recreation services.

As the City continues to experience population growth, additional parkland and recreational
facilities will be required to maintain an acceptable level of service for residents. The purpose of
this section of the Capital Improvements Element is to document the City’s existing parks and
recreation inventory, establish adopted levels of service, and identify future capital needs
associated with growth. These analyses provide the basis for long-range capital planning and for
the calculation of development impact fees attributable to new residential development.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
16

Service Area

The City of Stockbridge’s parks and recreation facilities operate as a citywide system. Park
facilities and recreational amenities are available to all residents regardless of location, and use
is not restricted to specific neighborhoods or geographic service districts. Access to parks and
recreation services is based on facility availability and programming rather than proximity to
individual residences.

Because parks and recreation facilities are intended to serve the City’s population as a whole, the
entire City of Stockbridge is considered a single service area for the provision of parks and
recreation services. All existing and future park facilities are planned, evaluated, and funded on
a citywide basis.

Level of Service
The Level of Service (LOS) for parks and recreation in the City of Stockbridge is measured by the
number of publicly accessible park acres provided per 1,000 residents. This LOS standard
represents the relationship between the City’s available parkland and the demand generated by
its residential population. Expressing service levels in terms of acreage per population is a
commonly accepted planning practice and provides a consistent, measurable basis for evaluating
existing conditions, forecasting future needs, and planning capital improvements.

The City’s adopted LOS is based on an inventory of City-owned and maintained park facilities that
provide recreational opportunities to residents citywide. Park acreage includes community parks,
neighborhood parks, athletic parks, and specialty parks that contribute to the overall parks and
recreation system. Linear facilities such as trails are evaluated separately due to their distinct
function and service characteristics and are addressed independently within this Capital
Improvements Element.

As of 2025, the City of Stockbridge maintains approximately 63.99 acres of parkland, serving a
population of 36,807 residents. This results in an existing Level of Service of approximately 1.74
acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which exceeds the City’s adopted LOS standard of 1.10
acres per 1,000 residents. The adopted LOS represents the minimum standard the City seeks to
maintain over time, while the existing LOS reflects current service delivery conditions.

The adopted LOS of 1.10 acres per 1,000 residents is used as the benchmark for evaluating future
park needs associated with population growth. Because the City’s existing park inventory exceeds
the acreage required to maintain this standard through the planning horizon, no additional
parkland acreage is required solely to accommodate projected population growth. The LOS

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
17

standard nonetheless remains an important planning tool for evaluating future improvements,
prioritizing investments, and determining the appropriate use of parks and recreation impact
fees for eligible facilities and amenities attributable to new development.
Level of Service Calculation Methodology

The Level of Service (LOS) for parks and recreation is calculated using a standard and widely
accepted planning methodology that expresses publicly accessible park acreage relative to
population. The LOS is determined by dividing the total amount of existing park acreage by the
current population and multiplying the result by 1,000 to express the service level in terms of
acres per 1,000 residents. This approach provides a consistent and measurable basis for
evaluating existing service delivery conditions and forecasting future park needs.

Applying this methodology to existing conditions in the City of Stockbridge, the City’s current
inventory of 63.99 acres of parkland and a 2025 population of 36,807 residents results in the
following calculation:

• (63.99 ÷ 36,807) × 1,000 = 1.74 acres per 1,000 residents

This calculated value represents the City’s existing parks and recreation Level of Service. The City
has adopted a LOS standard of 1.10 acres per 1,000 residents, which serves as the minimum
benchmark for evaluating future park needs associated with population growth. The adopted
LOS is used for long-range planning and impact fee analysis, while the existing LOS reflects
current park system capacity and service delivery conditions.

Table 7 - Existing Parks and Recreation Level of Service

Item Value
Service Area Citywide
Existing Park Acreage 63.99 acres
2025 Population 36,807
Existing LOS 1.74 acres per 1,000 residents
Adopted LOS Standard 1.10 acres per 1,000 residents

Service Area Forecasts

Future park demand in the City of Stockbridge is projected based on anticipated population
growth within the established citywide service area. Because parks and recreation facilities are
intended to serve all residents regardless of location, the City is treated as a single, citywide
service area for purposes of Level of Service (LOS) forecasting.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
18

Population projections indicate that Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase from
36,807 residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing an increase of 19,840
residents over the planning horizon. The City’s adopted Level of Service standard for parks and
recreation is 1.10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which serves as the minimum benchmark
for long-range planning and impact fee analysis.

Applying the adopted LOS standard to the projected 2050 population indicates that
approximately 62.31 acres of parkland would be required to maintain the adopted level of
service. Because the City’s existing park inventory totals approximately 63.99 acres, the City
already meets and slightly exceeds the park acreage necessary to maintain the adopted LOS
through the planning horizon. As a result, no additional parkland acquisition is required solely to
accommodate projected population growth through 2050.
Level of Service Forecast Calculation Methodology

The projected 2050 park acreage requirement is calculated by applying the City’s adopted Level
of Service (LOS) standard to the projected population. The adopted LOS for parks and recreation
is 1.10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which represents the minimum level of service the
City seeks to maintain over time.

Applying this methodology to the projected 2050 population yields the following calculation:

• (56,647 ÷ 1,000) × 1.10 = 62.31 acres required

The City’s existing park inventory totals approximately 63.99 acres, which exceeds the amount of
parkland required to maintain the adopted LOS through the planning horizon. As a result, no
additional park acreage is required to accommodate projected population growth through 2050.

This forecast confirms that the City’s current park system capacity is sufficient to meet future
demand based on the adopted LOS standard. Accordingly, growth-related park needs may be
addressed through facility improvements, amenities, or enhancements within the existing park
system, rather than through additional land acquisition.

Relationship to Capital Improvements and Impact Fees

Based on the updated Level of Service (LOS) analysis, the City of Stockbridge’s existing inventory
of parkland is sufficient to maintain the adopted parks and recreation Level of Service through
the 2050 planning horizon. As a result, no additional parkland acquisition is required to
accommodate projected population growth.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
19

While additional park acreage is not needed, future development will continue to generate
demand for improvements, enhancements, and amenities within the City’s existing parks system,
including but not limited to athletic fields, playgrounds, courts, support facilities, and site
improvements. Accordingly, eligible parks and recreation capital improvements identified in the
Capital Improvements Element are limited to facility development and improvement costs,
rather than land acquisition This approach ensures that new development contributes its
proportionate share toward growth-related capital improvements needed to maintain
acceptable access to parks and recreational opportunities, while preserving existing service levels
for current residents and avoiding the use of impact fees to fund deficiencies or excess capacity.

Scheduling Individual Costs

Improvements identified to address future parks and recreation needs cannot be scheduled on
an annual basis over the planning horizon with complete certainty. Accordingly, and consistent
with accepted capital planning practice, the City assigns an average year of implementation for
each project for purposes of forecasting costs, calculating impact fee eligibility, and determining
net present value where applicable.

The parks and recreation capital improvements identified in this Capital Improvements Element
are intended to maintain the City’s adopted Level of Service as population growth occurs through
2050. While specific improvement projects may be constructed earlier or later than anticipated
based on funding availability, policy direction, or implementation timing, all projects are assumed
to occur within the planning horizon and are evaluated for their relationship to future growth.

Consistent with the Level of Service analysis, the City’s existing park acreage is sufficient to meet
projected population growth through the planning horizon. Accordingly, parks and recreation
capital improvements are limited to facility development, enhancements, and support
infrastructure within the existing park system, more so than land acquisition. These
improvements address increased usage and demand generated by new development and are
therefore attributable, in part, to growth.

Projects identified to meet growth-related parks and recreation demand may be funded
through a combination of impact fees, general fund revenues, grants, donations, or other lawful
funding sources. The proportionate share of each project attributable to new development is
determined based on the Level of Service analysis and service area forecasts presented in the
preceding sections.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
20

Cost estimates for future parks and recreation improvements are informed by the City’s adopted
and proposed five-year capital improvement programming, including the FY 2026 budget. These
programming documents identify planned park acquisitions, facility improvements, and
supporting infrastructure funded through SPLOST and other lawful revenue sources. While many
of these projects address existing conditions or are fully funded outside the impact fee program,
they provide a benchmark for evaluating reasonable project costs, implementation timing, and
order-of-magnitude estimates for long-range capital planning.

Parks and Recreation Capital Projects and Costs
Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and service area forecasts presented above, the City
has identified a set of parks and recreation capital projects necessary to maintain acceptable
service levels as population growth occurs. Consistent with the LOS analysis, these projects
represent growth-related improvements necessary to maintain acceptable access and capacity
within the City’s existing park system.

These projects focus on facility development, enhancements, and support infrastructure within
existing parks rather than land acquisition. The table below summarizes estimated project costs
and identifies the portion of each project eligible for impact fee funding.

Table 8 - Parks & Recreation Capital Projects Cost Table

Estimated % Impact Fee Growth- Net Present
Project Description
Cost Eligible Related Cost Value (NPV)
Candler Road Dog Fencing, surfacing, seating,
Park lighting, signage, minor $450,000 100% $450,000 $501,711.27
Improvements grading
Two soccer fields, grading,
Soccer Field Park
irrigation, goals, parking, $3,200,000 100% $3,200,000 $3,567,724.59
Development
lighting
Lighting upgrades, turf
Athletic Field
improvements, drainage at $1,500,000 60% $900,000 $1,003,422.54
Enhancements
existing parks
Playground & New playground equipment
Court and basketball/multi-use $1,200,000 60% $720,000 $802,738.03
Improvements courts
Restrooms, pavilions,
Park Support
parking expansion, internal $1,800,000 50% $900,000 $1,003,422.54
Facilities
circulation
TOTAL $8,150,000 $6,170,000 $6,879,018.98

(Table 8)

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
21

The percentage of each parks and recreation capital project eligible for impact fee funding is
based on the relationship between the improvement and projected population growth,
consistent with the Level of Service analysis presented in this Capital Improvements Element.
Furthermore, the Net Present Value (NPV) considers foreseeable cost increases due to inflation,
as defined by annual percent increases in the Engineering News-Record’s (ENR) average Building
Cost Index (BCI) and Construction Cost Index (CCI) through 2035.

Projects that add new recreational capacity within the City’s existing park system and are
required to accommodate future population growth are considered 100 percent impact fee
eligible. These include new athletic fields and specialty park facilities that would not be
constructed but for anticipated growth.

Projects that expand or enhance existing facilities and provide benefit to both current and future
residents are assigned partial impact fee eligibility. In these cases, the eligible percentage reflects
the portion of the improvement reasonably attributable to increased usage generated by new
development. The remaining cost is attributed to existing residents and is funded through other
lawful revenue sources, such as SPLOST, grants, or the General Fund.

Routine maintenance, general park upkeep, and replacement of existing assets that do not
increase system capacity are excluded from impact fee eligibility and are not included in the cost
table.

Relationship to Impact Fee Schedule

The growth-related costs identified in the Parks and Recreation Capital Projects Cost Table
represent the portion of capital improvements attributable to new development based on the
City’s adopted Level of Service standard. These costs form the basis for calculating the parks and
recreation component of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule and ensure that future
development contributes its proportionate share toward maintaining acceptable access to parks
and recreational facilities, while avoiding the use of impact fees to fund existing deficiencies or
excess system capacity.

Trail System
The Stockbridge Trail System is a vital component of the City’s parks, recreation, and mobility
infrastructure, designed to provide safe, accessible opportunities for walking, jogging, bicycling,
and other non-motorized activities. Beyond recreation, the trail network enhances connectivity
between neighborhoods, parks, schools, commercial centers, and regional destinations,

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
22

supporting active transportation and reducing reliance on automobiles. This dual role promotes
public health, environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life.

The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) seeks to establish and maintain an adopted Level of
Service (LOS) for the trail system to ensure that infrastructure keeps pace with growth. By
defining LOS standards, the CIE provides a measurable benchmark for planning, funding, and
implementing trail improvements that meet community needs.

Introduction

The City of Stockbridge’s trail system is a key component of the City’s parks, recreation, and
mobility infrastructure. The trail network provides residents with opportunities for walking,
jogging, bicycling, and other non-motorized activities, while also enhancing connectivity between
neighborhoods, parks, schools, commercial areas, and regional destinations.

Unlike traditional park facilities that primarily serve localized areas, trail facilities function as
linear, citywide infrastructure designed to serve residents throughout the City. Trails support
both recreational use and active transportation, contributing to public health, environmental
sustainability, and overall quality of life.

Demand for trail facilities is driven primarily by the City’s residential population and increases as
population growth occurs. As Stockbridge continues to grow, the trail system plays an
increasingly important role in accommodating recreational demand, improving access to parks
and community destinations, and providing safe alternatives to vehicular travel.

The purpose of this section of the Capital Improvements Element is to document the City’s trail
system, establish the applicable service area and Level of Service framework, and identify future
capital improvements necessary to maintain acceptable service levels as population growth
occurs. These analyses provide the basis for long-range trail planning and for determining the
proportionate share of trail improvements attributable to new development for impact fee
purposes.

Service Area
The City of Stockbridge’s trail system operates as a citywide network intended to serve residents
throughout the entire City, rather than discrete neighborhoods or localized service districts. Trail
facilities are designed to provide continuous linear connectivity, linking residential areas to parks,
schools, commercial centers, employment areas, and regional trail corridors.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
23

Because trail facilities are intended to serve the City’s population as a whole, the entire City of
Stockbridge is considered a single, citywide service area for purposes of planning, Level of Service
evaluation, and capital improvements analysis. Access to trail facilities is based on network
connectivity and corridor availability rather than proximity to individual residences.

Existing and planned trail facilities are evaluated, programmed, and funded on a citywide basis.
Improvements to the trail system are intended to enhance overall system continuity, safety, and
capacity, and to accommodate increased usage associated with future population growth. As a
result, trail capital improvements identified in this Capital Improvements Element are
attributable, in whole or in part, to new development occurring within the City.

Establishing a citywide service area for the trail system provides a consistent framework for
forecasting future demand, identifying growth-related capital needs, and determining the
proportionate share of trail improvements eligible for impact fee funding.
Level of Service Calculation Methodology

The Level of Service (LOS) for the trail system in the City of Stockbridge is evaluated using a linear
facilities planning methodology that reflects the unique function and service characteristics of
multi-use trails. Unlike parks, which are measured by acreage, trail facilities are measured by
linear mileage and network connectivity, which more accurately represent system capacity, user
demand, and access.

Trail LOS is expressed in terms of miles of publicly accessible multi-use trails per 1,000 residents.
This methodology is consistent with accepted planning practice for bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure and allows the City to evaluate existing trail system capacity, forecast future needs,
and identify growth-related capital improvements attributable to new development.

The City’s adopted trail LOS is informed by its adopted planning documents, including the
Stockbridge Trails Plan, regional bicycle and pedestrian plans, and long-range transportation and
mobility studies. These plans identify priority trail corridors, network gaps, and desired levels of
connectivity needed to serve current and future residents.

Because the City’s trail system functions as an interconnected, citywide network, LOS evaluation
focuses on overall system completeness and capacity rather than minimum distance thresholds
or neighborhood-based service radii. Improvements that extend trail mileage, close system gaps,
enhance connectivity between destinations, or improve safety and accessibility increase overall
system capacity and are therefore evaluated for their relationship to future population growth.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
24

This LOS methodology provides the basis for determining which trail capital projects are
attributable, in whole or in part, to growth and are eligible for impact fee funding, as
distinguished from routine maintenance, rehabilitation, or non-capacity-expanding
improvements.

Table 9 - Existing Trail System Level of Service

Item Value
Service Area Citywide
Existing Trail Mileage 3.3 miles
2025 Population 36,807
Existing Trail LOS 0.09 miles per 1,000 residents
Adopted Trail LOS Standard 0.65 miles per 1,000 residents

The City of Stockbridge has adopted a Level of Service (LOS) standard for its trail system
expressed as miles of publicly accessible multi-use trails per 1,000 residents. This approach
reflects the linear nature of trail facilities and is consistent with accepted planning practice for
evaluating pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Based on the City’s adopted trail plans and long-range vision for a connected, citywide network
linking parks, schools, neighborhoods, downtown, and regional trail corridors, the City has
established an adopted trail LOS standard of 0.65 miles of trail per 1,000 residents. This standard
represents the minimum level of service the City seeks to maintain as population growth occurs
and provides a consistent benchmark for evaluating existing conditions, forecasting future trail
needs, and identifying growth-related capital improvements.

The adopted LOS is used for long-range planning and impact fee analysis, while the existing trail
LOS reflects current system capacity. Because the City’s existing trail mileage is below the
adopted LOS standard, future trail projects identified in this Capital Improvements Element are
necessary to accommodate growth-related demand and achieve the City’s planned trail network.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
25

Map 2 - Stockbridge Trail Network

Level of Service and Forecasts
Level of Service
Future trail demand in the City of Stockbridge is projected based on anticipated population
growth within the established citywide service area. Because the trail system functions as an
interconnected, citywide network serving residents regardless of location, the City is treated as
a single service area for purposes of trail Level of Service (LOS) forecasting. Population projections
indicate that Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase from 36,807 residents in 2025 to
56,647 residents by 2050, representing an increase of 19,840 residents over the planning horizon.
As population increases, demand for pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, recreational trail
access, and non-vehicular transportation options is expected to increase proportionally.

The City has adopted a trail LOS standard of 0.65 miles of publicly accessible multi-use trails per
1,000 residents, representing the minimum level of service necessary to support a connected and
functional trail network. Based on existing conditions, the City currently maintains approximately
3.3 miles of publicly accessible trails, equating to an existing LOS of approximately 0.09 miles per
1,000 residents, which is below the adopted LOS standard.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
26

Forecasts

Applying the adopted LOS standard to the projected 2050 population establishes the total trail
mileage required to serve future residents and provides the basis for identifying growth-related
trail capital improvements necessary to expand system capacity, improve connectivity, and
maintain acceptable levels of service as population growth occurs.
Trail Level of Service Forecast Calculation Methodology

The projected 2050 trail mileage requirement for the City of Stockbridge is calculated by applying
the City’s adopted trail Level of Service (LOS) standard to the projected population within the
citywide service area. The adopted trail LOS is 0.65 miles of publicly accessible multi-use trails
per 1,000 residents, which represents the minimum level of service the City seeks to maintain
over time.

Applying this methodology to the projected 2050 population yields the following calculation:

• (56,647 ÷ 1,000) × 0.65 = 36.82 miles of trail required

The City’s existing trail system consists of approximately 3.3 miles of publicly accessible trails,
resulting in a significant shortfall relative to the adopted LOS standard. The difference between
the projected trail mileage requirement and the existing system represents the amount of
additional trail mileage necessary to accommodate future population growth and achieve the
City’s planned trail network:

• 36.82 miles required − 3.3 existing miles = 33.52 additional miles needed

This forecast quantifies the growth-related expansion of the trail system necessary to maintain
the City’s adopted Level of Service through the 2050 planning horizon. The identified trail mileage
deficit forms the basis for evaluating future trail capital improvements and determining the
proportionate share of trail projects attributable to new development as part of the City’s impact
fee program.

Relationship to Capital Improvements and Impact Fees – Trail System

Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and service area forecasts presented above, the City
of Stockbridge’s existing trail system does not meet the adopted LOS standard of 0.65 miles of
publicly accessible multi-use trails per 1,000 residents. As population growth occurs through the
2050 planning horizon, additional trail mileage and supporting infrastructure will be required to
expand system capacity, improve connectivity, and accommodate increased demand generated
by new development. Trail capital improvements identified in this Capital Improvements

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
27

Element—including new trail construction, extensions, gap closures, trailheads, and supporting
amenities—are considered capacity-expanding improvements and are eligible, in whole or in
part, for impact fee funding based on their relationship to population growth and system
expansion.

Trail projects that add new mileage, extend the trail network, improve system connectivity, or
create new access points within the City’s planned trail system are considered capacity-
expanding improvements and are eligible for impact fee funding to the extent that they are
required to serve future residents. These improvements would not be constructed, or would be
deferred, absent anticipated population growth and increased usage of the trail system.

Projects that enhance or upgrade existing trail facilities, such as safety improvements, lighting,
signage, surface upgrades, or rehabilitation, may provide benefit to both existing and future
residents. In these cases, only the portion of the improvement reasonably attributable to
increased usage generated by new development is considered impact fee eligible. The remaining
costs are attributed to existing residents and are funded through other lawful revenue sources,
including SPLOST, grants, or the General Fund.

Routine maintenance, repair, or non-capacity-expanding improvements that do not increase trail
mileage, connectivity, or system capacity are excluded from impact fee eligibility and are not
included in the trail capital projects used to calculate impact fees. This approach ensures that
future development contributes its proportionate share toward the expansion and improvement
of the City’s trail system, while preserving existing service levels for current residents and
avoiding the use of impact fees to fund existing deficiencies or general maintenance obligations.

The trail capital projects identified below represent capacity-expanding improvements necessary
to meet the City of Stockbridge’s adopted trail Level of Service and to accommodate projected
population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. Projects that add new trail mileage,
extend the trail network, close system gaps, or create new access points are considered 100
percent impact fee eligible, as these improvements would not be constructed but for anticipated
growth. For these projects, a Net Present Value (NPV) is calculated to account for foreseeable
cost increases due to inflation, as defined by annual percent increases in ENR’s average
Construction Cost Index (CCI) through 2035. Projects that provide both system expansion and
shared benefit to existing residents—such as trailheads and wayfinding—are assigned partial
impact fee eligibility based on the portion of the improvement reasonably attributable to
increased usage generated by new development. Routine maintenance, rehabilitation, or non-

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
28

capacity-expanding improvements are excluded from impact fee eligibility and are not included
in this table.

The growth-related costs identified herein form the basis for calculating the trail component of
the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule and ensure that future development contributes its
proportionate share toward expansion of the City’s trail system, without funding existing
deficiencies or ongoing maintenance obligations.

Table 10- Trail Capital Projects Cost Table
Project Description Estimated % Impact Growth- Net Present
Cost Fee Eligible Related Cost Value (NPV)
Walt Stephens New multi-use trail $3,500,000 100% $3,500,000 $3,902,199.36
Road Trail construction along Walt
Stephens Road

Reeves Creek Trail Extension of Reeves $2,800,000 100% $2,800,000 $3,121,759.02
Extension (2 miles) Creek Trail to expand
network connectivity

Brush Creek Trail New multi-use trail $2,400,000 100% $2,400,000 $2,675,793.44
(2.5 miles) corridor providing
regional connectivity

MLK, Sr. Heritage New spur trail improving $425,000 100% $425,000 $473,838.42
Trail – Spur to neighborhood and
Floyd Chapel institutional access
Baptist Church
(0.25 miles)

MLK, Sr. Heritage New spur trail $355,000 100% $355,000 $395,794.45
Trail – Spur to connecting downtown
Green Front Café destinations
(0.25 miles)

Continuation of Extension of existing $625,000 100% $625,000 $696,821.21
MLK, Sr. Heritage trail corridor to close
Trail (0.75 miles) system gaps

Potential Trailhead Trailhead, parking, $500,000 75% $375,000 $418,092.73
at Reeves Creek / signage, and access
MLK Sr. Heritage improvements
Trail

Wayfinding & Trail System-wide signage, $160,000 50% $80,000 $89,193.11
Signage (Digital & wayfinding, and user
DeNyse Signage) information

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
29

Scheduling Individual Costs – Trail System

Improvements identified to address future trail system needs cannot be scheduled on an annual
basis over the planning horizon with complete certainty. Accordingly, and consistent with
accepted capital planning practice, the City assigns an average year of implementation for each
trail project for purposes of forecasting costs, calculating impact fee eligibility, and determining
net present value where applicable. The trail capital improvements identified in this Capital
Improvements Element are intended to expand system capacity, improve network connectivity,
and maintain the City’s adopted Level of Service as population growth occurs through the 2050
planning horizon. While specific trail projects may be constructed earlier or later than anticipated
based on funding availability, coordination with regional partners, right-of-way constraints, or
implementation timing, all identified improvements are assumed to occur within the planning
horizon and are evaluated for their relationship to future growth.

Consistent with the Level of Service analysis, the City’s existing trail system does not currently
meet the adopted trail Level of Service standard. Accordingly, trail capital improvements
identified in this Capital Improvements Element include new trail construction, extensions, gap
closures, trailheads, and supporting infrastructure necessary to accommodate increased usage
generated by new residential and mixed-use development. These improvements are
attributable, in whole or in part, to growth. Projects identified to meet growth-related trail
demand may be funded through a combination of impact fees, SPLOST revenues, grants,
partnerships, or other lawful funding sources. The proportionate share of each project
attributable to new development is determined based on the Level of Service analysis and service
area forecasts presented in the preceding sections.

Routine maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, or non-capacity-expanding improvements that do
not increase trail mileage, connectivity, or overall system capacity are excluded from growth-
related cost calculations and are not eligible for impact fee funding.

Future Costs

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s trail system are driven by the need to expand trail
mileage, improve network connectivity, and provide supporting infrastructure necessary to
accommodate projected population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. Based on the
Level of Service (LOS) analysis and service area forecasts presented above, the City has identified
a series of trail capital improvements required to move toward the adopted trail LOS standard
and implement the City’s planned trail network. Trail-related future costs include expenses

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
30

associated with new trail construction, trail extensions, gap closures, spur connections,
trailheads, wayfinding and signage, lighting, bridges or boardwalks, and related engineering and
design services. These improvements are necessary to increase system capacity, enhance safety,
improve connectivity between destinations, and ensure that the trail network can serve both
existing and future residents.

Cost estimates for future trail improvements are derived from adopted planning documents,
including the Stockbridge Trails Plan, regional bicycle and pedestrian plans, and conceptual
engineering estimates prepared for specific trail corridors. These estimates reflect current
construction costs and include allowances for engineering, design, and contingency where
applicable. Because the City’s trail system functions as an interconnected, citywide network,
future trail costs are evaluated on a system-wide basis rather than by individual neighborhood
service areas. Improvements that add trail mileage, extend the trail network, close critical gaps,
or significantly enhance connectivity are considered capacity-expanding and are directly related
to accommodating future population growth. These projects form the basis for evaluating
growth-related capital costs and determining the portion of trail improvements eligible for
impact fee funding.

Not all trail-related costs are attributable to growth. Routine maintenance, repair, rehabilitation,
or non-capacity-expanding improvements that do not increase trail mileage, connectivity, or
overall system capacity are excluded from growth-related cost calculations and are not eligible
for impact fee funding. Only those costs associated with expanding or enhancing the trail system
to serve additional users are included in the Capital Improvements Element for impact fee
purposes. The future trail costs identified in this Capital Improvements Element establish the
basis for evaluating growth-related capital improvements, assigning impact fee eligibility, and
calculating the trail component of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule. This approach
ensures that future development contributes its proportionate share toward expansion and
improvement of the City’s trail system, while preserving existing service levels for current
residents and avoiding the use of impact fees to fund existing deficiencies or ongoing
maintenance obligations.
Trail Impact Fee Calculation Methodology

The trail impact fee is calculated using a growth-based methodology that allocates the cost of
capacity-expanding trail improvements proportionately to new development, consistent with the
City of Stockbridge’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard and projected population growth
through the 2050 planning horizon. The calculation is based on the total growth-related cost of

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
31

trail capital improvements identified in the Trail Capital Projects Cost Table. These projects
include new trail construction, extensions, gap closures, trailheads, and supporting amenities
that expand system capacity and connectivity. Routine maintenance, repair, and non-capacity-
expanding improvements are excluded.

Population projections indicate that Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase from
36,807 residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing a growth of 19,840 residents.
The total growth-related trail capital cost of $10,560,000 is divided by the projected population
growth to determine a per-resident cost of approximately $532 per resident. To express the
impact fee on a per-unit basis, the per-resident cost is multiplied by the City’s assumed average
household size of 2.5 persons per dwelling unit, resulting in a trail impact fee of approximately
$1,331 per dwelling unit.

This methodology ensures that new development contributes its proportionate share toward
trail system expansion necessary to serve future residents, consistent with the principles of
rational nexus, proportionality, and benefit.

Trail Impact Fee Calculation Formula

Per-Resident Trail Cost

Total Growth-Related Trail Capital Cost
Per-Resident Cost =
Projected Population Growth
$10,560,000
= ≈ $𝟓𝟑𝟐 per resident
19,840

Per-Dwelling Unit Trail Impact Fee

Trail Impact Fee (per dwelling unit) = Per-Resident Cost × Average Household Size
= $532 × 2.5 = $𝟏, 𝟑𝟑𝟏 per dwelling unit

Relationship to Impact Fee Schedule – Trail System

The growth-related costs identified for the Trail System represent the portion of trail capital
improvements necessary to expand system capacity and connectivity in order to accommodate
projected population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. These costs are derived from
the City’s adopted trail Level of Service (LOS) standard and the capital projects identified in this
Capital Improvements Element.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
32

The eligible share of trail improvement costs forms the basis for calculating the trail component
of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule. By allocating only those costs attributable to
new development, the impact fee program ensures that future growth contributes its
proportionate share toward the expansion of the trail network, while avoiding the use of impact
fees to fund existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or improvements that primarily benefit
existing residents.

Based on the growth-related trail capital costs identified in this Capital Improvements Element
and projected population growth through 2050, the trail impact fee is calculated at
approximately $1,331 per dwelling unit, representing the proportionate share of trail system
expansion attributable to new residential development.
Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Parks & Recreation
The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of
persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Resident
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $532

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $1,331

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
33

WATER
Water
The City of Stockbridge’s water system is a critical public utility that supports residential,
commercial, institutional, and industrial development throughout the City. The system provides
a reliable supply of potable water for domestic consumption, sanitation, fire protection, and
economic activity, while also supporting public health, safety, and overall quality of life for
residents, businesses, and visitors. The water system consists of interconnected treatment,
transmission, storage, and distribution facilities that operate as an integrated, citywide network.
These components are designed to meet daily water demands, accommodate peak usage
conditions, and provide adequate pressure and flow for emergency response and fire
suppression. Because water infrastructure must function continuously and reliably, long-range
planning and capital investment are essential to maintaining system performance as
development and population growth occur.

Introduction

As the City continues to grow, increased residential density, commercial activity, and institutional
development place additional demand on the water system. Growth-related demand requires
ongoing investment in water supply capacity, storage facilities, transmission mains, and
distribution infrastructure to ensure that service levels remain consistent with adopted standards
and regulatory requirements. Failure to plan for these needs could result in capacity constraints,
reduced system reliability, or the need for emergency infrastructure upgrades.

The purpose of this section of the Capital Improvements Element is to document the City’s water
service framework, define the applicable service area and Level of Service (LOS), and evaluate
future system demands based on projected population growth. This analysis identifies the capital
improvements necessary to maintain acceptable water service levels through the 2050 planning
horizon and distinguishes between improvements needed to serve existing users and those
attributable to new development.

This section also establishes the technical and policy foundation for calculating water system
impact fees. By linking projected growth, system capacity, and capital improvement needs, the
City ensures that new development contributes its proportionate share toward water

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
34

infrastructure expansion, while avoiding the use of impact fees to address existing deficiencies
or routine system maintenance. This approach supports fiscal sustainability, equitable cost
allocation, and compliance with state impact fee requirements.

Service Area
The City of Stockbridge’s water system is designed and operated as a unified, citywide service
network. Water facilities provide service to all developed properties within the City limits and are
intended to support future growth in accordance with adopted land use policies and
development patterns. Because water infrastructure functions as an interconnected system of
supply, treatment, storage, transmission, and distribution components, the entire City is treated
as a single service area for purposes of planning, Level of Service (LOS) analysis, and capital
improvements evaluation. Water service is provided through a combination of source water
supply, treatment capacity, elevated and ground storage facilities, transmission mains, and local
distribution lines that collectively serve residential neighborhoods, commercial corridors,
employment centers, institutional uses, and public facilities throughout Stockbridge. These
facilities are planned to ensure adequate water pressure, volume, and redundancy under both
average daily demand and peak usage conditions, including fire flow requirements.

The citywide service area approach reflects the operational realities of the water system, as
individual system components do not serve isolated geographic subareas but instead function
collectively to meet overall system demand. Improvements to water supply, storage, or
transmission infrastructure typically benefit users throughout the City rather than a specific
development or neighborhood. For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis,
future water demand generated by population and development growth is evaluated on a
citywide basis. Capital improvements identified to maintain or expand water system capacity are
therefore allocated across the entire service area, and the costs attributable to growth are
assessed proportionately to new development regardless of location within the City.

This service area designation ensures consistency with accepted utility planning practices and
provides a clear framework for evaluating growth-related capital needs, scheduling
improvements, and establishing water impact fees that equitably distribute costs among future
system users.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
35

Level of Service and Forecasts
Level of Service

The Level of Service (LOS) for the City of Stockbridge’s water system is measured in terms of
average potable water demand relative to population served, consistent with accepted utility
planning practice. Water system LOS reflects the ability of the City’s treatment, storage,
transmission, and distribution infrastructure to meet average and peak demands, maintain
adequate pressure, and provide reliable service to residents and businesses throughout the City.
Per-capita water demand is used as the basis for evaluating system capacity because it reflects
actual utilization patterns and allows the City to project future water needs associated with
growth. Based on historical usage data and projected conservation trends, the City has adopted
a planning per-capita demand rate of approximately 87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) for
long-range planning and impact fee analysis. This rate is derived from the City of Stockbridge
Water Conservation Plan (2019), which analyzed historical potable water use and projected
future efficiency gains due to conservation practices, plumbing code improvements, and water
efficiency measures.
Forecasts
Population projections indicate that the City’s population is expected to increase from 36,807
residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing an increase of 19,840 residents over
the planning horizon. Applying the adopted per-capita demand rate of 87.9 GPCD produces the
following growth-related average water demand increase:

• 19,840 residents × 87.9 GPCD = 1,744,536 GPD ≈ 1.74 MGD

Future Costs

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s water system are driven by the need to accommodate
projected growth-related increases in potable water demand while maintaining acceptable levels
of service for existing users. As population increases, additional demand is placed on the City’s
water treatment, storage, transmission, and distribution infrastructure. Growth-related capital
improvements are therefore necessary to ensure that adequate system capacity, pressure,
redundancy, and fire protection capabilities are maintained throughout the planning horizon.
Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis presented above, future water demand is projected
using a per-capita demand methodology consistent with accepted utility planning practice. The
City’s adopted planning demand rate of 87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) is derived from

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
36

the City of Stockbridge Water Conservation Plan (2019) and reflects historical water usage trends,
conservation measures, plumbing code requirements, and anticipated efficiency gains.

Population projections indicate that the City’s population is expected to increase from 36,807
residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing a projected growth of 19,840
residents over the planning horizon. Applying the adopted per-capita demand rate to this
population increase yields the following projected growth-related water demand:

Projected Growth-Related Water Demand Formula:

• Projected Population Growth × Per-Capita Water Demand = Additional Average Daily
Demand

Calculation:

• 19,840 residents × 87.9 GPCD = 1,744,536 gallons per day

This equates to approximately 1.74 million gallons per day (MGD) of additional average water
demand attributable to future population growth through 2050.

While the City’s existing water system currently provides adequate capacity to meet near-term
demands, continued population growth will ultimately require capacity-expanding capital
improvements to serve additional users. These future improvements may include expansion of
water treatment capacity, construction of additional finished water storage, and upgrades to
transmission and distribution infrastructure necessary to maintain adequate pressure, system
reliability, redundancy, and fire flow standards. Because the City does not currently have a
comprehensive water master plan identifying specific capacity expansion projects and associated
costs, future water system improvements are evaluated on a system-wide basis using projected
demand growth rather than individual facility thresholds. Only capital improvements that expand
overall system capacity to serve new development are considered eligible for impact fee funding.
Routine maintenance, asset replacement, regulatory compliance projects, and improvements
required solely to serve existing users are excluded from impact fee eligibility.

The projected growth-related increase in water demand provides the basis for evaluating future
capacity needs, identifying impact-fee-eligible capital improvements, and establishing the
proportional share of water system expansion costs attributable to new development within the
City of Stockbridge.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
37

Future Costs and Impact Fee Framework – Water System

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s water system are driven by the need to accommodate
projected growth-related increases in potable water demand while maintaining the adopted
Level of Service (LOS) for both existing and future users. As population and development
increase, additional demand is placed on the City’s interconnected water treatment, storage,
transmission, and distribution infrastructure. Capital improvements that expand overall system
capacity are therefore necessary to ensure adequate water supply, pressure, redundancy, and
fire protection throughout the 2050 planning horizon. Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis
and population forecasts presented above, future water system needs are evaluated using a
demand-based planning methodology consistent with accepted utility planning practice. Rather
than relying solely on individual facility capacity thresholds, system adequacy is assessed on a
citywide basis using projected population growth and adopted per-capita water demand rates.
This approach reflects the integrated nature of the City’s water system, in which treatment,
storage, transmission, and distribution components function collectively to meet overall demand
rather than serving isolated geographic subareas.

The City’s adopted planning demand rate of 87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD), derived from
the 2019 Water Conservation Plan, incorporates historical usage patterns, conservation
measures, and anticipated efficiency gains. Applying this demand rate to projected population
growth provides a reasonable and defensible estimate of additional system capacity required to
serve future residents. This demand-based methodology establishes the technical basis for
identifying growth-related capital needs and evaluating the proportional share of water system
expansion attributable to new development. Because the City does not currently have a
comprehensive water master plan that identifies specific capacity-expansion projects, locations,
and costs, future water system improvements are evaluated at the system level rather than tied
to individual facilities. Potential growth-related capital improvements may include, but are not
limited to, expansion of water treatment capacity, construction of additional finished water
storage, upsizing or extension of transmission mains, and distribution system improvements
necessary to maintain system pressure, reliability, redundancy, and fire flow standards as
demand increases.

Only those capital improvements that expand overall system capacity to serve additional users
are considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance, asset replacement,
rehabilitation of aging infrastructure, regulatory compliance projects, and improvements
required solely to address existing deficiencies or serve current users are excluded from impact

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
38

fee eligibility. This distinction ensures that impact fees are used exclusively to fund capacity-
expanding improvements necessitated by growth, consistent with state impact fee requirements
and the principles of rational nexus and proportionality.

The projected growth-related increase in water demand identified in the Level of Service analysis
provides the basis for evaluating future capacity needs, establishing an impact-fee-eligible cost
framework, and calculating the proportionate share of water system expansion costs attributable
to new development. This framework allows the City to update specific project scopes and cost
estimates over time—such as through future master planning efforts or capital budgeting—
without altering the underlying methodology used to allocate costs between existing and future
system users.
Growth-Related Water Demand Calculation
To evaluate future water system needs and establish a defensible basis for long-range planning
and impact fee analysis, the City of Stockbridge estimates growth-related potable water demand
using a per-capita demand methodology consistent with accepted utility planning practices. This
approach links projected population growth to anticipated increases in average daily water
demand and provides a measurable framework for assessing future system capacity
requirements.

The City has adopted a long-range planning per-capita demand rate of 87.9 gallons per capita per
day (GPCD). This demand rate is derived from historical water consumption data and future
efficiency projections contained in the City of Stockbridge Water Conservation Plan (2019). The
adopted GPCD reflects existing usage patterns, anticipated reductions associated with water
conservation measures, plumbing code standards, fixture efficiency improvements, and ongoing
public education efforts. As such, it represents a reasonable and conservative estimate of future
average daily potable water demand attributable to residential population growth.

Population projections indicate that the City’s population is expected to increase from 36,807
residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing a projected growth of 19,840
residents over the planning horizon. This projected increase in population forms the basis for
estimating additional water system demand associated with future development.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
39

Calculation Methodology

Projected growth-related water demand is calculated using the following formula:

• Projected Population Growth × Per-Capita Water Demand = Additional Average Daily
Water Demand

Calculation:

• 19,840 residents × 87.9 gallons per capita per day = 1,744,536 gallons per day

This calculation results in an estimated 1,744,536 gallons per day, or approximately 1.74 million
gallons per day (MGD), of additional average daily potable water demand attributable to
population growth through the 2050 planning horizon.

Planning Implications

This projected increase in average daily demand represents the incremental water system
capacity that must be accommodated to maintain acceptable levels of service for both existing
and future users. While peak day demands, fire flow requirements, and operational redundancy
are addressed through system design and operational standards, average daily demand provides
a consistent and widely accepted basis for long-range capacity planning and impact fee analysis.

The estimated 1.74 MGD of growth-related demand establishes the quantitative foundation for
evaluating future water system improvements, identifying capacity-expanding capital projects,
and allocating the proportional share of water infrastructure costs attributable to new
development. This demand-based approach ensures that future growth contributes equitably to
the expansion of the City’s water system, while avoiding the use of impact fees to fund existing
deficiencies or routine system maintenance.
Water Impact Fee Calculation Methodology

The water impact fee is calculated using a growth-based methodology that allocates the cost of
capacity-expanding water system improvements proportionately to new development,
consistent with the City of Stockbridge’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard and projected
population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. The calculation is based on the total
estimated cost of water system capacity expansion required to accommodate projected growth-
related increases in potable water demand. Capacity needs are measured using a per-capita

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
40

demand methodology derived from the City’s adopted planning demand rate of 87.9 gallons per
capita per day (GPCD) and projected population growth.

Population projections indicate that Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase by 19,840
residents between 2025 and 2050. Applying the adopted per-capita demand rate results in an
estimated 1.74 million gallons per day (MGD) of additional average daily water demand
attributable to future development. In the absence of a comprehensive water master plan
identifying specific capacity expansion projects and costs, the City evaluates future water system
improvements on a systemwide basis. A planning-level unit cost of $4.5 million per MGD is
applied to the projected growth-related demand to estimate the total capital cost necessary to
expand water system capacity.

Calculation

• Projected Growth Demand × Cost per MGD = Growth-Related Capital Cost
• 1.74 MGD × $4,500,000 per MGD = $7,830,000

The resulting $7.83 million represents the estimated growth-related share of future water system
capital improvements required to maintain acceptable service levels through the planning
horizon.

To express the water impact fee on a per-unit basis, the total growth-related cost is divided by
projected population growth and converted to a per-dwelling-unit cost using the City’s assumed
average household size of 2.5 persons per dwelling unit.

Per-Resident Cost

• $7,830,000 ÷ 19,840 residents ≈ $395 per resident

Per-Dwelling Unit Cost

• $395 × 2.5 persons per unit ≈ $988 per dwelling unit

Accordingly, the water impact fee is calculated at approximately $990 per dwelling unit,
representing the proportionate share of water system capacity expansion attributable to new
residential development.

This methodology ensures compliance with rational nexus, proportionality, and benefit principles
by allocating only those costs associated with serving future growth, while excluding routine
maintenance, asset replacement, and improvements required solely to serve existing users.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
41

Future Costs and Impact Fee Framework – Water System

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s water system are driven by the need to accommodate
projected growth-related increases in potable water demand while maintaining the adopted
Level of Service (LOS) for both existing and future users. As population and development
increase, additional demand is placed on the City’s interconnected water treatment, storage,
transmission, and distribution infrastructure. Capital improvements that expand overall system
capacity are therefore necessary to ensure adequate water supply, pressure, redundancy, and
fire protection throughout the 2050 planning horizon.

Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and population forecasts presented above, future
water system needs are evaluated using a demand-based planning methodology consistent with
accepted utility planning practices. System adequacy is assessed on a citywide basis using
projected population growth and adopted per-capita water demand rates, reflecting the
integrated nature of the City’s water system in which individual components function collectively
to meet overall demand.

The City’s adopted planning demand rate of 87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) is derived
from the City of Stockbridge Water Conservation Plan (2019) and reflects historical water usage
patterns, conservation measures, plumbing code requirements, and anticipated efficiency gains.
Applying this demand rate to projected population growth provides a reasonable and measurable
estimate of additional system capacity required to serve future residents and establishes the
technical basis for identifying growth-related capital needs.

Future growth-related water system improvements may include, but are not limited to,
expansion of treatment capacity, construction of additional finished water storage, and upgrades
to transmission and distribution infrastructure necessary to maintain adequate pressure, system
reliability, redundancy, and fire flow standards as demand increases. These improvements
benefit the water system as a whole and support service delivery to future development
throughout the City.

Only capital improvements that expand overall system capacity to serve new development are
considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance, asset replacement,
rehabilitation of aging infrastructure, regulatory compliance projects, and improvements
required solely to serve existing users are excluded from impact fee eligibility. This distinction
ensures that impact fees are used exclusively to fund capacity-expanding improvements

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
42

necessitated by growth, consistent with state impact fee requirements and the principles of
rational nexus and proportionality.

The projected growth-related increase in water demand identified in the Level of Service analysis
provides the basis for evaluating future capacity needs, establishing an impact-fee-eligible cost
framework, and calculating the proportional share of water system expansion costs attributable
to new development. This framework allows future refinement of specific project scopes and
cost estimates through ongoing planning and budgeting processes without altering the
underlying methodology used to allocate costs between existing and future system users.

Water System Capital Improvement Categories and Impact Fee Eligibility
For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis, future water system capital
improvements are categorized based on whether they expand overall system capacity to serve
new development or address existing system needs. This classification reflects the integrated
nature of the City’s water system, in which treatment, storage, transmission, and distribution
components function collectively to meet citywide demand.

Only capital improvements that increase system capacity to accommodate projected growth are
considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance, asset replacement,
rehabilitation of aging infrastructure, and regulatory compliance projects that do not expand
system capacity are excluded from impact fee eligibility

Table 11 - Water System Capital Improvement Categories
Improvement Description Impact Fee
Category Eligibility
Water Treatment Expansion of potable water treatment capacity Eligible
Capacity necessary to serve increased average daily and peak
demands
Finished Water Additional elevated or ground storage required to Eligible
Storage maintain pressure, redundancy, and fire protection
as demand increases
Transmission Mains Upsizing or extension of major mains required to Eligible
convey increased systemwide water demand
Distribution Capacity Distribution system improvements that increase Eligible
hydraulic capacity to serve new development
System Rehabilitation Pipe replacement, leak repair, asset rehabilitation, Not Eligible
& Maintenance and regulatory compliance improvements
The growth-related costs identified for the Water System represent the portion of water system
capital improvements necessary to expand overall system capacity to accommodate projected

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
43

population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. These costs are derived from the City’s
adopted Level of Service standard, projected growth-related water demand, and a systemwide
capacity-based planning framework.

The eligible share of water system improvement costs forms the basis for calculating the water
component of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule. By allocating only those costs
attributable to new development, the impact fee program ensures that future growth
contributes its proportionate share toward water system expansion, while avoiding the use of
impact fees to fund existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or regulatory compliance
improvements that primarily benefit existing users.

Water Impact Fee Summary (Planning Horizon: 2025–2050)

• Projected Population Growth: 19,840 residents
• Adopted LOS Metric: 87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD)
• Estimated Growth-Related Demand: 1.74 MGD
• Planning-Level Unit Cost: $4.5 million per MGD
• Total Growth-Related Capital Cost: $7.83 million

Calculated Impact Fee

• Per Resident: ~$395
• Per Dwelling Unit (2.5 persons/unit): ~$990

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Water

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of
persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Resident
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $395

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $990

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
44

Sewer
The City of Stockbridge’s sanitary sewer system is a critical public utility that supports residential,
commercial, institutional, and industrial development throughout the City. The sewer system
provides for the safe collection, conveyance, treatment, and disposal of wastewater, protecting
public health, surface and groundwater quality, and the natural environment. Reliable sewer
service is essential to maintaining sanitary conditions, supporting economic activity, and
complying with state and federal environmental regulations.

The sewer system consists of interconnected gravity collection mains, lift stations, force mains,
and downstream treatment capacity that operate together as an integrated, citywide network.
These components are designed to accommodate average daily wastewater flows, peak wet-
weather conditions, and system redundancy needs while preventing overflows, backups, and
treatment capacity exceedances. Because sewer infrastructure must operate continuously and is
subject to stringent regulatory requirements, long-range planning and coordinated capital
investment are essential to maintaining system performance over time.

As the City continues to grow, increased residential density, commercial development, and
institutional uses generate additional wastewater flows that place increased demand on the
sewer system. Growth-related demand requires capacity-expanding investments in collection,
conveyance, pumping, and treatment infrastructure to ensure that service levels remain
consistent with adopted standards and regulatory requirements. Without proactive planning,
population growth could result in system bottlenecks, surcharging, increased inflow and
infiltration impacts, or the need for emergency infrastructure upgrades.

The purpose of this section of the Capital Improvements Element is to document the City’s sewer
service framework, define the applicable service area and Level of Service (LOS), evaluate future
system demands based on projected population growth, and establish the technical and policy
foundation for calculating sewer system impact fees. This analysis identifies the capital
improvements necessary to maintain acceptable sewer service levels through the 2050 planning
horizon and distinguishes between improvements needed to serve existing users and those
attributable to new development.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
45

Service Area

The City of Stockbridge’s sanitary sewer system is designed and operated as a unified, citywide
service network. Sewer facilities provide service to developed properties within the City limits
and are intended to support future growth in accordance with adopted land use policies and
development patterns. Because sewer infrastructure functions as an interconnected system of
collection, conveyance, pumping, and treatment components, the entire City is treated as a
single service area for purposes of planning, Level of Service (LOS) analysis, and capital
improvements evaluation.

Individual sewer system components do not serve isolated geographic subareas but instead
function collectively to meet overall system demand. Improvements to trunk mains, lift
stations, force mains, or treatment capacity typically benefit users throughout the City rather
than a specific development or neighborhood. Accordingly, for long-range planning and impact
fee analysis, future wastewater demand generated by population and development growth is
evaluated on a citywide basis. Capital improvements identified to maintain or expand sewer
system capacity are therefore allocated across the entire service area, and the costs
attributable to growth are assessed proportionately to new development regardless of location
within the City. This service area designation reflects accepted utility planning practice and
provides a clear and defensible framework for evaluating growth-related capital needs and
allocating sewer impact fees equitably among future system users.

Level of Service
The Level of Service (LOS) for the City of Stockbridge’s sanitary sewer system is measured in
terms of average wastewater flow relative to the population served, consistent with
accepted wastewater planning practices. Sewer system LOS reflects the ability of the City’s
collection, conveyance, pumping, and treatment infrastructure to safely and reliably manage
average daily and peak wet-weather flows without system surcharging, overflows, or
treatment capacity exceedances.

Per-capita wastewater generation is used as the basis for evaluating sewer system capacity
because it provides a consistent measure of demand and allows the City to project future
wastewater flows associated with population growth. For long-range planning and impact fee
analysis, wastewater generation is assumed to closely correspond to potable water usage.
Accordingly, the City applies the same per-capita demand rate used for water system planning—
87.9 gallons per capita per day (GPCD)—as a conservative proxy for average wastewater flow.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
46

Forecasts
Population projections indicate that the City’s population is expected to increase from 36,807
residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing a projected increase of 19,840
residents over the planning horizon.

Applying the adopted per-capita wastewater generation rate produces the following growth-
related increase in average daily sewer flow:

• 19,840 residents × 87.9 GPCD = 1,744,536 gallons per day ≈ 1.74 MGD

This projected increase represents the additional average daily wastewater flow attributable to
future population growth through the 2050 planning horizon and establishes the quantitative
basis for evaluating future sewer system capacity needs.

Future Costs and Impact Fee Framework – Sewer System
Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s sewer system are driven by the need to accommodate
projected growth-related increases in wastewater flows while maintaining acceptable levels of
service for both existing and future users. As population and development increase, additional
demand is placed on the City’s interconnected sewer collection, conveyance, pumping, and
treatment infrastructure.

Growth-related capital improvements are therefore necessary to ensure adequate system
capacity, reliability, and regulatory compliance throughout the planning horizon. These
improvements may include, but are not limited to, expansion of treatment capacity, upsizing or
extension of trunk sewer mains, upgrades to lift stations, and improvements to force mains
required to convey increased systemwide wastewater flows.

Because the City does not currently have a comprehensive sewer master plan identifying specific
capacity-expansion projects, locations, and costs, future sewer system improvements are
evaluated using a systemwide, demand-based planning framework rather than individual facility
thresholds. This approach reflects the integrated nature of the sewer system and provides a
reasonable and defensible basis for identifying growth-related capital needs.

Only capital improvements that expand overall system capacity to serve new development are
considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance, rehabilitation of aging
infrastructure, inflow and infiltration reduction projects, regulatory compliance improvements,
and upgrades required solely to address existing deficiencies are excluded from impact fee

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
47

eligibility. This distinction ensures compliance with state impact fee requirements and the
principles of rational nexus, proportionality, and benefit.
Sewer System Capital Improvement Categories and Impact Fee Eligibility

For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis, future sanitary sewer system capital
improvements are categorized based on whether they expand overall system capacity to serve
new development or address existing system needs. This classification reflects the integrated
nature of the City’s sewer system, in which collection, conveyance, pumping, and treatment
components function collectively to manage citywide wastewater flows.

Only capital improvements that increase system capacity to accommodate projected growth are
considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance, rehabilitation of aging
infrastructure, inflow and infiltration reduction, regulatory compliance projects, and
improvements required solely to serve existing users are excluded from impact fee eligibility.

Table 12- Sewer System Capital Improvement Categories
Impact Fee
Improvement Category Description
Eligibility
Expansion of wastewater treatment capacity necessary to serve
Wastewater Treatment
increased average daily and peak flows generated by future Eligible
Capacity
development
Upsizing or extension of major gravity sewer mains required to convey
Trunk Sewer Mains Eligible
increased systemwide wastewater flows
Lift Stations & Force New or expanded lift stations and force mains required to serve
Eligible
Mains increased wastewater demand from new development
Collection System Sewer system improvements that increase hydraulic capacity to serve
Eligible
Capacity new development
System Rehabilitation & Pipe replacement, inflow and infiltration reduction, asset
Not Eligible
Maintenance rehabilitation, and regulatory compliance improvements

The growth-related costs identified for the Sewer System represent the portion of sewer system
capital improvements necessary to expand overall system capacity to accommodate projected
population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. These costs are derived from the City’s
adopted Level of Service standard, projected growth-related wastewater demand, and a
systemwide capacity-based planning framework.

Sewer Impact Fee Summary (Planning Horizon: 2025–2050)

• Projected Population Growth: 19,840 residents
• Estimated Growth-Related Sewer Demand: 1.74 MGD (water demand) × 90% return
factor = 1.57 MGD

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
48

• Planning-Level Unit Cost: $7.0 million per MGD
• Estimated Growth-Related Capital Cost: ~$11.0 million

Calculated Impact Fee:

• Per Resident: ~$554
• Per Dwelling Unit (2.5 persons/unit): ~$1,385

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Sewer

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of
persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Resident
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $554

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $1,385

Stormwater
The City of Stockbridge’s stormwater system is a critical public infrastructure network that
protects public safety, property, and environmental resources by managing the collection,
conveyance, treatment, and discharge of stormwater runoff. The system reduces flooding risks,
minimizes erosion, and protects water quality in receiving streams and watersheds throughout
the City. Stormwater infrastructure supports residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial
development by safely accommodating runoff generated by impervious surfaces such as
rooftops, roadways, parking areas, and sidewalks. The stormwater system consists of
interconnected components including pipes, culverts, open channels, detention and retention
facilities, outfalls, and water quality structures. These components operate as an integrated,
citywide network designed to manage runoff under both frequent rainfall events and larger
storm conditions. Because stormwater facilities must function reliably to protect life and
property, long-range planning and capital investment are essential as development and
impervious surface coverage increase over time.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
49

Introduction

As the City continues to grow, new development increases impervious surfaces and runoff
volumes, placing additional demand on the stormwater system. Growth-related demand
requires capital investment in stormwater conveyance capacity, regional detention facilities, and
drainage infrastructure to maintain acceptable service levels and reduce flooding impacts. Failure
to plan for these needs may result in localized flooding, infrastructure failures, or increased
maintenance and emergency response costs. The purpose of this section of the Capital
Improvements Element is to document the City’s stormwater service framework, define the
applicable service area and Level of Service (LOS), evaluate future system demands based on
projected growth, and establish a defensible basis for identifying growth-related capital
improvements and calculating stormwater impact fees.
Service Area

The City of Stockbridge’s stormwater system is planned and operated as a unified, citywide
service network. Stormwater facilities provide drainage service to all developed properties within
the City limits and are intended to support future growth in accordance with adopted land use
policies and development patterns. Because stormwater runoff does not conform to parcel
boundaries and is influenced by watershed conditions, drainage patterns, and interconnected
conveyance systems, the entire City is treated as a single service area for purposes of planning,
Level of Service (LOS) analysis, and capital improvements evaluation. Improvements to major
stormwater conveyance infrastructure, detention facilities, and flood control systems typically
benefit multiple drainage areas and properties throughout the City rather than isolated locations.

For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis, future stormwater demand
generated by population growth and increased impervious surface coverage is evaluated on a
citywide basis. Capital improvements necessary to manage growth-related runoff are therefore
allocated across the entire service area, and the costs attributable to growth are assessed
proportionately to new development regardless of location within the City.

Level of Service

The Level of Service (LOS) for the City of Stockbridge’s stormwater system is measured in terms
of the system’s ability to safely convey and manage stormwater runoff generated by existing and
future development while minimizing flooding, erosion, and water quality impacts. Stormwater
LOS reflects the capacity of conveyance infrastructure, detention facilities, and drainage systems
to accommodate runoff associated with increasing impervious surfaces.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
50

For planning and impact fee purposes, stormwater demand is directly related to development
intensity and impervious surface coverage rather than population alone. As development occurs,
increased impervious area results in higher runoff volumes and peak flows, necessitating
capacity-expanding stormwater infrastructure improvements to maintain acceptable service
levels.

Forecasts

Population projections indicate that the City’s population is expected to increase from 36,807
residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing growth of 19,840 residents. This
growth is expected to be accompanied by increased residential, commercial, and institutional
development, resulting in additional impervious surface coverage and increased stormwater
runoff volumes throughout the City. The projected increase in impervious area associated with
future development forms the basis for evaluating growth-related stormwater system needs and
identifying capacity-expanding capital improvements necessary to maintain acceptable levels of
service through the planning horizon.

Future Costs

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s stormwater system are driven by the need to
accommodate increased runoff volumes generated by new development while maintaining
acceptable drainage performance and minimizing flooding risks. As impervious surface coverage
increases, additional capacity is required within the stormwater conveyance and detention
system to safely manage peak flows and protect downstream properties and infrastructure.
Based on the Level of Service analysis and growth forecasts presented above, future stormwater
system needs are evaluated using a systemwide, capacity-based planning approach. Rather than
relying solely on site-specific drainage improvements, the City evaluates stormwater adequacy
on a citywide basis, recognizing that major conveyance facilities, regional detention systems, and
drainage improvements often serve multiple developments and drainage areas.

Growth-related stormwater capital improvements may include, but are not limited to, expansion
of regional detention or retention facilities, upsizing or extension of major stormwater
conveyance infrastructure, construction of flood control facilities, and drainage system
improvements necessary to manage increased runoff volumes associated with future
development. Only capital improvements that expand overall stormwater system capacity to
serve new development are considered eligible for impact fee funding. Routine maintenance,

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
51

erosion repair, pipe rehabilitation, regulatory compliance projects, and improvements required
solely to address existing drainage deficiencies are excluded from impact fee eligibility.

Stormwater Capital Improvement Categories and Impact Fee Eligibility
For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis, future stormwater system capital
improvements are categorized based on whether they expand overall system capacity to manage
increased runoff generated by new development or address existing maintenance and system
needs.

Table 13- Stormwater System Capital Improvement Categories

Improvement Impact Fee
Description
Category Eligibility
Construction or expansion of regional detention,
Regional Stormwater
retention, or flood control facilities required to manage Eligible
Facilities
increased runoff from new development
Upsizing or extension of primary stormwater
Major Conveyance
conveyance infrastructure required to accommodate Eligible
Capacity
increased runoff volumes
Drainage System
Stormwater system improvements that increase
Capacity Eligible
hydraulic capacity to serve new development
Improvements
Water Quality
Stormwater treatment facilities required to address
Facilities (Growth- Eligible
water quality impacts generated by new development
Related)
System Rehabilitation Pipe replacement, ditch maintenance, culvert repair,
Not Eligible
& Maintenance erosion repair, and regulatory compliance projects

Relationship to Impact Fee Schedule – Stormwater System
The growth-related costs identified for the Stormwater System represent the portion of
stormwater capital improvements necessary to expand overall system capacity to manage runoff
generated by projected population and development growth through the 2050 planning horizon.
These costs are derived from the City’s adopted Level of Service framework and a systemwide
capacity-based planning approach.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
52

The eligible share of stormwater system improvement costs forms the basis for calculating the
stormwater component of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule. By allocating only those
costs attributable to new development, the impact fee program ensures that future growth
contributes its proportionate share toward stormwater system expansion, while avoiding the use
of impact fees to fund existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or regulatory compliance
obligations.
Stormwater Impact Fee Calculation Methodology

The stormwater impact fee is calculated using a growth-based methodology that allocates the
cost of capacity-expanding stormwater system improvements proportionately to new
development, consistent with the City of Stockbridge’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) framework
and projected growth through the 2050 planning horizon. The methodology is designed to ensure
a rational nexus between new development, increased stormwater runoff, and the capital
improvements required to manage that runoff.

Stormwater demand is directly related to development intensity and impervious surface
coverage rather than population alone. As new development occurs, additional impervious
surfaces generate increased runoff volumes and peak flows, requiring expansion of stormwater
conveyance capacity, regional detention facilities, and drainage infrastructure to maintain
acceptable levels of service and minimize flooding impacts.

Because the City does not currently have a comprehensive stormwater master plan identifying
specific capacity expansion projects and costs, future stormwater system improvements are
evaluated on a systemwide basis. Growth-related capital needs are estimated using a planning-
level cost framework that reflects typical stormwater infrastructure investments necessary to
accommodate increased runoff associated with future development.

Methodology Framework

The stormwater impact fee calculation follows these steps:

1. Identify Growth Driver
Stormwater demand is driven by new development and increased impervious surface
coverage associated with population and employment growth.
2. Estimate Growth-Related Capital Costs
Planning-level stormwater capital costs are identified for capacity-expanding
improvements such as:
o Regional detention and retention facilities
o Major conveyance system expansions
o Drainage system capacity upgrades

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
53

Routine maintenance, rehabilitation, erosion repair, and regulatory compliance projects
are excluded.

3. Allocate Costs to New Development
Only the portion of stormwater capital improvements required to serve future
development is included in the impact fee calculation.
4. Convert Costs to a Per-Unit Fee
Total growth-related stormwater costs are allocated across projected development to
establish an impact fee on a per-dwelling-unit or per-square-foot basis, depending on
land use type.

Conceptual Calculation Formula

For planning and documentation purposes, the stormwater impact fee is calculated using the
following framework:

• Growth-Related Stormwater Capital Cost ÷ Projected Growth Units = Stormwater
Impact Fee Rate

This approach ensures that the stormwater impact fee reflects only the proportional share of
capacity expansion costs attributable to new development and complies with the principles of
rational nexus, proportionality, and benefit.

The resulting stormwater impact fee is incorporated into the City’s impact fee schedule alongside
water and sewer fees, ensuring coordinated infrastructure funding while maintaining fiscal equity
between existing and future users.

Stormwater Impact Fee Summary (Planning Horizon: 2025–2050)

• Projected Population Growth: 19,840 residents
• Estimated New Dwelling Units: 19,840 ÷ 2.5 persons/unit = 7,936 dwelling unit
• Estimated Impervious Surface Increase: 7,936 units × 0.30 acres/unit = 2,381
impervious acres
• Planning-Level Unit Cost: $35,000 per impervious acre
• Estimated Total Stormwater Capital Cost: 2,381 acres × $35,000 ≈ $83.3 million
• Impact-Fee-Eligible Share (60%): ≈ $50.0 million

Calculated Impact Fee

• Per Impervious Acre: ≈ $21,000
• Per Dwelling Unit (0.30 impervious acres/unit): ≈ $6,300

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
54

Table 14 - Utility Impact Fee Summary
Category Water System Sewer System Stormwater System
Planning Horizon 2025–2050 2025–2050 2025–2050
Projected Population
19,840 residents 19,840 residents 19,840 residents
Growth
Potable water Wastewater return Impervious surface
Primary Growth Driver
demand flow runoff
Gallons per capita per
LOS / Planning Metric Return flow factor Impervious acres
day (GPCD)
90% of water 0.30 impervious acres
Adopted Planning Rate 87.9 GPCD
demand per dwelling unit
Estimated Growth-
1.74 MGD 1.57 MGD 2,381 impervious acres
Related Demand
$7.0 million per $35,000 per impervious
Planning-Level Unit Cost $4.5 million per MGD
MGD acre
Estimated Growth-
~$7.83 million ~$11.0 million ~$83.3 million
Related Capital Cost
Impact-Fee-Eligible 100% (capacity 100% (capacity 60% (growth-related
Share expansion) expansion) share)
Eligible Capital Cost ~$7.83 million ~$11.0 million ~$50.0 million

Table 15 -Fee Structure
Fee Basis Water Sewer Stormwater
Per Resident ~$395 ~$554 ~$2,520
Assumed Household Size 2.5 persons/unit 2.5 persons/unit 2.5 persons/unit
Per Dwelling Unit ~$990 ~$1,385 ~$6,300

The Utility Impact Fee Summary Table presents a consolidated overview of projected growth-
related infrastructure needs for the City of Stockbridge’s water, sewer, and stormwater systems
over the 2025–2050 planning horizon. The analysis is based on a projected population increase
of 19,840 residents and applies consistent, demand-based methodologies to ensure proportional
and defensible allocation of infrastructure costs to new development.

For the water system, future demand is estimated using the City’s adopted planning rate of 87.9
gallons per capita per day (GPCD), resulting in an additional average daily demand of
approximately 1.74 million gallons per day (MGD). Applying a planning-level unit cost of $4.5

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
55

million per MGD yields an estimated growth-related capital cost of approximately $7.83 million.
This cost represents capacity-expanding improvements necessary to maintain adequate supply,
pressure, storage, and fire protection as development occurs.

For the sewer system, growth-related demand is calculated by applying a 90 percent return flow
factor to projected water demand, resulting in an estimated 1.57 MGD of additional wastewater
flow attributable to future development. Using a planning-level unit cost of $7.0 million per MGD,
the estimated growth-related sewer capital cost is approximately $11.0 million. These costs
reflect capacity-expanding improvements needed to accommodate increased wastewater flows
while maintaining system performance and regulatory compliance.

For the stormwater system, growth-related demand is driven by increases in impervious surface
area associated with new development. Based on projected residential growth and an estimated
impervious area generation rate of 0.30 impervious acres per dwelling unit, future development
is expected to add approximately 2,381 impervious acres citywide. Applying a planning-level unit
cost of $35,000 per impervious acre and assigning a conservative 60 percent growth-related
eligibility factor results in an estimated impact-fee-eligible stormwater capital cost of
approximately $50.0 million. This reflects the portion of stormwater improvements necessary to
manage runoff generated by new development, excluding costs attributable to existing
conditions or regulatory compliance.

When expressed on a per-unit basis using an assumed household size of 2.5 persons per dwelling
unit, the resulting impact fees are approximately $990 per dwelling unit for water, $1,385 per
dwelling unit for sewer, and $6,300 per dwelling unit for stormwater. Collectively, these fees
ensure that new development contributes its proportionate share toward the expansion of utility
infrastructure needed to serve future growth, while avoiding the use of impact fees to address
existing deficiencies or routine maintenance.

This unified framework provides the City with a transparent, defensible, and flexible
methodology for calculating utility impact fees that can be refined over time as more detailed
master planning, project scoping, or cost estimates become available.

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Stormwater

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
56

persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Impervious Acre
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $21,000

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $6,300

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
57

CULTURAL FACILITIES
Cultural facilities are essential public assets that support civic life, cultural expression, education,
and community engagement throughout the City of Stockbridge. These facilities provide spaces
for public meetings, arts and cultural programming, recreational and educational activities, and
community services that enhance quality of life for residents and contribute to the City’s social
and economic vitality. Cultural facilities also support tourism, historic preservation, and
intergenerational interaction, strengthening the City’s sense of place and community identity. As
Stockbridge continues to grow, increased population and development place additional demand
on cultural facilities, including meeting space, multi-purpose community facilities, arts and
cultural venues, and related public amenities. Growth-related demand requires planned
investment in facilities that expand public-use capacity to serve future residents while
maintaining acceptable levels of service for existing users. Long-range planning and capital
investment are therefore essential to ensure that cultural facilities remain accessible, functional,
and responsive to community needs as the City grows.

The purpose of this section of the Capital Improvements Element is to document the City’s
cultural facilities service framework, define the applicable service area and Level of Service (LOS),
and evaluate future facility needs based on projected population growth through the 2050
planning horizon. This analysis identifies capital improvements necessary to maintain acceptable
service levels and distinguishes between improvements attributable to new development and
those intended to serve existing users. This section also establishes the technical and policy
foundation for calculating cultural facilities impact fees. By linking projected growth, facility
capacity, and capital improvement needs, the City ensures that new development contributes its
proportionate share toward cultural facility expansion, while avoiding the use of impact fees to
fund existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or operational costs.

Service Area
Cultural facilities in the City of Stockbridge are planned and operated as a unified, citywide service
system. These facilities provide services and programming that benefit residents throughout the
City, regardless of neighborhood or development location. Because cultural facilities function as
centralized or shared community assets—such as conference centers, multi-purpose facilities,
cultural and arts centers, and community meeting spaces—the entire City is treated as a single
service area for purposes of planning, Level of Service (LOS) analysis, and capital improvements
evaluation.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
58

The citywide service area approach reflects the operational realities of cultural facilities, which
are designed to serve broad community needs rather than localized service areas. Improvements
to cultural facilities typically benefit current and future residents across the City and are not tied
to specific developments or geographic subareas. For purposes of long-range planning and
impact fee analysis, demand for cultural facilities generated by population growth is evaluated
on a citywide basis, and growth-related capital costs are allocated proportionately to new
development throughout the City.

This service area designation ensures consistency with accepted impact fee planning practices
and provides a clear framework for evaluating growth-related capital needs, scheduling
improvements, and establishing cultural facilities impact fees that equitably distribute costs
among future system users.

Level of Service
The Level of Service (LOS) for cultural facilities is measured in terms of the City’s ability to provide
adequate public-use space, programming capacity, and facility access relative to the population
served. Cultural facilities LOS reflects the availability and functional capacity of public meeting
spaces, community centers, arts and cultural venues, and multi-purpose facilities to
accommodate community demand as population increases. Because cultural facility usage is
closely tied to population size, demographic composition, and community participation rather
than daily consumption rates, LOS is evaluated using a population-based planning approach. This
approach assesses whether existing and planned facilities provide sufficient capacity to serve
both current residents and future population growth while maintaining acceptable access,
functionality, and programming opportunities.

Forecasts

Population projections indicate that the City of Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase
from approximately 36,807 residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing an
increase of 19,840 residents over the planning horizon. This projected growth is expected to
increase demand for cultural facilities, including community meeting space, conference facilities,
arts and cultural programming, and multi-purpose civic facilities. As population increases,
additional public-use facility capacity will be required to maintain acceptable levels of service.
These growth-related demands form the basis for identifying future capital improvements
necessary to expand cultural facilities capacity and for determining the portion of capital costs
attributable to new development.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
59

Future Costs

Future costs for the City of Stockbridge’s cultural facilities are driven by the need to
accommodate increased demand for public-use spaces and cultural programming associated
with population growth. Growth-related capital improvements are necessary to expand facility
capacity, enhance functionality, and ensure that cultural facilities can continue to serve both
existing and future residents at acceptable levels of service. Future cultural facility improvements
may include, but are not limited to, construction or expansion of multi-purpose community
facilities, conference, and meeting centers, cultural and arts facilities, and associated support
spaces that increase public-use capacity. Because cultural facilities often serve multiple
functions—including civic, educational, and cultural uses—only the portion of capital
improvements that expands public-use capacity attributable to new development is considered
eligible for impact fee funding.

Routine maintenance, operational costs, administrative functions, asset replacement, and
improvements required solely to address existing deficiencies or serve current users are excluded
from impact fee eligibility. This distinction ensures that impact fees are used exclusively to fund
capacity-expanding improvements necessitated by growth, consistent with state impact fee
requirements and the principles of rational nexus and proportionality.
Cultural Facilities Capital Improvement Categories and Impact Fee Eligibility

For purposes of long-range planning and impact fee analysis, cultural facilities capital
improvements are categorized based on whether they expand public-use capacity to serve new
development or address existing operational or maintenance needs. This classification reflects
the shared, citywide nature of cultural facilities and provides a clear framework for determining
impact fee eligibility.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
60

Table 16 - Impact Fee Eligibility
Improvement Description Impact Fee
Category Eligibility
Multi-Purpose Facilities providing public meeting space, community Eligible
Community Facilities programming, and shared civic uses that expand (Partial)
capacity for future residents
Conference & Public-access conference and meeting facilities Eligible
Meeting Facilities serving community events, educational uses, and (Partial)
civic functions
Cultural & Arts Facilities supporting arts, cultural programming, Eligible
Facilities exhibitions, and performances for public benefit (Partial)
Support & Back-of-house, administrative, or operational areas Not Eligible
Administrative not directly serving public-use capacity
Spaces
Maintenance & Routine maintenance, repairs, equipment Not Eligible
Operations replacement, and operational costs
Cultural Facilities Impact Fee Calculation Methodology

The cultural facilities impact fee is calculated using a growth-based methodology that allocates
the cost of capacity-expanding cultural facility improvements proportionately to new
development, consistent with the City of Stockbridge’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) framework
and projected population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. The methodology is
designed to ensure a clear rational nexus, proportionality, and benefit relationship between new
development and the capital improvements funded through impact fees. Only the portion of
capital costs attributable to expanding public-use facility capacity to serve future residents is
included in the impact fee calculation.

Because cultural facilities serve the community at large and function as shared civic assets, future
demand for cultural facilities is evaluated on a citywide basis using projected population growth
rather than parcel-specific thresholds.

Methodology Framework

The cultural facilities impact fee calculation follows these steps:

1. Identify Growth Driver
Demand for cultural facilities is driven primarily by population growth and increased
participation in civic, cultural, and community activities.
2. Identify Growth-Related Capital Improvements
Capital improvements that expand public-use capacity—such as conference centers,
multi-purpose facilities, and cultural and arts centers—are identified as growth-related.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
61

3. Determine Impact Fee Eligibility Percentage
Because many cultural facilities serve both existing and future residents, only the
portion of each project attributable to growth is included in the impact fee calculation.
4. Allocate Costs to New Development
The growth-related share of eligible capital costs is allocated proportionately to
projected population growth.
5. Convert to Per-Unit Fee
Growth-related costs are converted to a per-resident and per-dwelling-unit impact fee
using the City’s assumed average household size of 2.5 persons per dwelling unit.

Impact Fee Eligibility – Selected Cultural Facility Projects

Based on the eligibility criteria established above, the following projects are appropriate for
inclusion in the Cultural Facilities Capital Projects Cost Table.

Table 17 - Cultural Facilities Capital Projects Cost

Total Estimated Impact Fee
Item Project Growth-Related Cost
Cost Eligibility
Merle Manders
25 $2,000,000 50% $1,000,000
Conference Center
Multi-Purpose Facility
29 $10,000,000 60% $6,000,000
(Youth/Senior)
30 Cultural Arts Center $34,000,000 50% $17,000,000

Eligibility Rationale for Cultural Facilities
The Merle Manders Conference Center provides public meeting space, civic programming, and
community event capacity that serves both existing residents and future population growth.
Because the facility accommodates general public use and supports expanded civic activity
associated with new development, a portion of its capital cost is reasonably attributable to
growth. However, because the facility also serves the existing population, only a partial share of
the total project cost is considered eligible for impact fee funding, reflecting the shared benefit
between current and future residents.

The proposed Multi-Purpose Facility intended to serve youth, seniors, and the general public
represents a capacity-expanding investment directly related to anticipated population growth.
As the City’s population increases, demand for community programming, recreational activities,
educational services, and public gathering space will similarly increase. This facility is designed to
expand public-use capacity beyond existing levels and is therefore substantially attributable to

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
62

growth. A majority portion of the project cost is considered impact fee eligible, with the
remaining share allocated to existing residents who will also benefit from the facility.

The proposed Cultural Arts Center is intended to function as a major civic and cultural amenity
serving residents citywide and, potentially, the broader region. While future population growth
will increase demand for cultural programming, arts education, and public events, the facility will
also provide immediate benefit to the existing population. As a result, only a portion of the
project’s capital cost is attributed to growth-related demand. The assigned impact fee eligibility
percentage reflects the shared nature of the benefit while recognizing the role of future
development in driving the need for expanded cultural facility capacity.

Cultural Facilities Impact Fee Summary

(Planning Horizon: 2025–2050)

Projected Population Growth:
• 19,840 residents

Total Estimated Eligible Cultural Facilities Capital Cost:
• $24,000,000

Calculated Impact Fee

• Per Resident:
$24,000,000 ÷ 19,840 residents ≈ $1,210 per resident

• Per Dwelling Unit (2.5 persons/unit):
$1,210 × 2.5 ≈ $3,025 per dwelling unit

Resulting Cultural Facilities Impact Fee:
Approximately $3,025 per dwelling unit

Based on projected population growth of 19,840 residents between 2025 and 2050, the City of
Stockbridge has identified approximately $24.0 million in growth-related capital improvements
for cultural facilities that are eligible for impact fee funding. These costs reflect the portion of
cultural facility investments attributable to new development and necessary to maintain
acceptable levels of civic, cultural, and community service capacity as the population increases.
Dividing the total eligible capital cost by projected population growth results in an estimated cost
of approximately $1,210 per resident. Applying the City’s assumed average household size of 2.5
persons per dwelling unit yields a calculated cultural facilities impact fee of approximately $3,025

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
63

per dwelling unit. This impact fee ensures that future development contributes its proportionate
share toward the expansion of cultural facilities needed to serve growth, while avoiding the use
of impact fees to fund facilities or capacity that primarily benefit existing residents.

Relationship to Impact Fee Schedule – Cultural Facilities

The growth-related costs identified for Cultural Facilities represent the portion of capital
improvements necessary to expand public-use facility capacity to accommodate projected
population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. These costs are derived from the City’s
adopted Level of Service framework, projected population growth, and a citywide capacity-based
planning approach.

The eligible share of cultural facility improvement costs forms the basis for calculating the cultural
facilities component of the City of Stockbridge’s impact fee schedule. By allocating only those
costs attributable to new development, the impact fee program ensures that future growth
contributes its proportionate share toward cultural facility expansion, while avoiding the use of
impact fees to fund existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or operational costs that primarily
benefit existing residents.
Cultural Facilities Capital Projects and Costs

Based on the Level of Service (LOS) analysis and projected population growth through the 2050
planning horizon, the City of Stockbridge has identified a set of cultural facilities capital
improvements necessary to maintain acceptable service levels as growth occurs. Cultural
facilities include civic, cultural, educational, and community-oriented facilities that provide public
access to cultural programming, historical preservation, recreation, learning, and civic
engagement.

Consistent with impact fee requirements, only those capital improvements that expand facility
capacity or accessibility to serve future residents are considered eligible for impact fee funding.
Improvements that primarily address maintenance, rehabilitation, or operational needs of
existing facilities are excluded.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
64

Table 18 - Cultural Facilities Capital Projects Cost Table

Facility / Estimated Impact Fee
Description
Project Capital Cost Eligibility
Burke Cemetery Expansion of burial capacity, circulation improvements, and
$2,500,000 Eligible
Expansion supporting infrastructure to serve future population growth
Police
Eligible
Department Expansion of police facilities to accommodate additional staffing,
$6,000,000 (Growth
Facilities training, and public service space necessitated by population growth
Share Only)
(Growth Share)
Recreation
Community-oriented recreation facilities providing multipurpose Eligible
Facilities (Civic $5,000,000
civic and cultural programming (Partial)
Use Share)
Public Library Expansion of library space, collections, and public access areas to
$4,000,000 Eligible
Expansion maintain service levels as population increases
Museums / Development or expansion of public museum or cultural exhibit
$2,000,000 Eligible
Cultural Exhibits space serving citywide residents
Multipurpose
Construction or expansion of a multipurpose facility supporting
Community $4,500,000 Eligible
cultural events, meetings, and community programs
Center
Cultural & Arts Development of a centralized cultural and arts facility providing
$6,000,000 Eligible
Center exhibition, performance, and educational space
Total Growth-Related Capital Cost $24,000,000

Impact Fee Eligibility Rationale

Projects included in the Cultural Facilities Capital Projects Cost Table meet the following criteria
for impact fee eligibility:

• The improvements expand facility capacity or public access to serve future population
growth
• The facilities provide citywide benefit, consistent with a citywide service area
• The improvements are not required to remedy existing deficiencies
• Routine maintenance, rehabilitation, or operational costs are excluded
• Where facilities serve both existing and future residents, only the growth-related share
is included

Relationship to Impact Fee Calculation

The total growth-related cultural facilities capital cost of approximately $24.0 million represents
the portion of capital investment attributable to projected population growth through 2050. This

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
65

cost forms the basis for calculating the cultural facilities component of the City’s impact fee
schedule and ensures compliance with the principles of rational nexus, proportionality, and
benefit.
Cultural Facilities Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
The cultural facilities impact fee is calculated using a growth-based methodology that allocates
the cost of capacity-expanding cultural facility improvements proportionately to new
development, consistent with the City of Stockbridge’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) framework
and projected population growth through the 2050 planning horizon. The calculation is based on
the total cost of growth-related cultural facilities capital projects identified in the Capital
Improvements Element.

Cultural facilities included in this analysis consist of public facilities that provide cultural,
educational, civic, and community-oriented services, including libraries, multipurpose
community centers, cultural and arts facilities, museums, civic recreation facilities, and other
publicly accessible cultural amenities. Only capital improvements that expand facility capacity or
accessibility to serve future residents are included. Routine maintenance, rehabilitation, and
operational costs are excluded from impact fee eligibility.

Growth Basis

Population projections indicate that the City of Stockbridge’s population is expected to increase
from 36,807 residents in 2025 to 56,647 residents by 2050, representing a projected growth of
19,840 residents over the planning horizon. This projected increase in population forms the basis
for allocating the cost of growth-related cultural facilities.

Total Growth-Related Capital Cost

Based on the Cultural Facilities Capital Projects Cost Table, the total estimated cost of growth-
related cultural facilities improvements is:

• Total Growth-Related Capital Cost: $24,000,000

Per-Resident Cost Calculation

The per-resident cost of cultural facilities expansion is calculated by dividing the total growth-
related capital cost by the projected population increase:

Formula:

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
66

• Total Growth-Related Capital Cost ÷ Projected Population Growth = Cost per Resident

Calculation:

• $24,000,000 ÷ 19,840 residents ≈ $1,210 per resident

Per-Dwelling Unit Impact Fee Calculation

To express the cultural facilities impact fee on a per-dwelling-unit basis, the per-resident cost is
multiplied by the City’s assumed average household size of 2.5 persons per dwelling unit,
consistent with other impact fee calculations in this Capital Improvements Element.

Formula:

• Cost per Resident × Average Household Size = Cost per Dwelling Unit

Calculation:

• $1,210 × 2.5 persons per unit ≈ $3,025 per dwelling unit

Calculated Cultural Facilities Impact Fee

Based on the methodology above, the cultural facilities impact fee is calculated at
approximately:

• $1,210 per resident, or
• $3,025 per dwelling unit

Methodology Summary and Compliance

This methodology ensures that:

• Only growth-related, capacity-expanding cultural facilities are funded through impact
fees
• Costs are allocated in proportion to projected population growth
• Existing residents are not charged for facilities needed to serve new development
• The impact fee complies with the principles of rational nexus, proportionality, and
benefit, as required by state impact fee law

The cultural facilities impact fee provides a fair and predictable mechanism for ensuring that
future development contributes its proportionate share toward maintaining access to cultural,
civic, and community facilities as the City of Stockbridge grows through 2050.

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Cultural Facilities

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
67

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of
persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Impervious Acre
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $1,210

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $3,02

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
68

ROADS
The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) is intended to set and uphold an adopted Level of
Service (LOS) for the City’s roadway network, ensuring that transportation facilities are
adequate to serve current and future growth. Establishing LOS standards creates a clear,
objective framework for evaluating system performance and guiding the prioritization, funding,
and delivery of roadway improvements that promote safety, efficiency, and community
mobility.

Introduction

The road network in the City of Stockbridge plays a central role in supporting economic vitality,
quality of life, and long-term growth. Well-connected and well-maintained streets enable
residents to access jobs, schools, healthcare, and recreational amenities, while also facilitating
the movement of goods and services that sustain local businesses. The road system shapes
development patterns by influencing where housing, commercial activity, and civic uses locate,
thereby affecting land values and redevelopment potential. In Stockbridge, where local
corridors also serve regional travel demands, roadway capacity, safety, and multimodal
accommodations are critical to balancing neighborhood livability with economic
competitiveness. Strategic investment in the transportation network therefore supports not
only mobility, but also equitable access, public safety, and the City’s broader goals for
sustainable and resilient community development.

Service Area

The service area for these road projects encompasses the entire city, as the projects function as
components of the citywide system of principal streets and thoroughfares that provide primary
access to properties throughout the community. All new developments rely on this
interconnected network for mobility and access. Accordingly, improvements made to any
segment of the system to address congestion or increase capacity will enhance overall system
performance and benefit development citywide.

Level of Service Calculation Methodology

Roadway improvement projects benefit both existing and future users by reducing congestion
and correcting capacity deficiencies, thereby improving overall traffic operations. Because
development anticipated through 2050 will account for a measurable share of total traffic in

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
69

that horizon year, new growth is appropriately assigned a proportionate share of the costs
associated with these roadway improvements.

The impacts of traffic not generated within Stockbridge but traveling through the city are
partially offset by state and federal transportation funding. Consequently, the portion of
project costs funded by the City of Stockbridge reasonably corresponds—and is roughly
proportional—to the roadway impacts created by Stockbridge residents, commuters traveling
into the city for employment, and visitors accessing the city for commercial, business, or
recreational purposes.

On this basis, the roadway impact fee is derived by allocating Stockbridge’s share of roadway
improvement costs across the total volume of traffic generated within the city in 2045,
including both existing development and future growth, to establish a per-trip cost. This per-
trip cost is then applied exclusively to trips generated by new development. At the time a
building permit is issued, the fee for an individual land use is calculated by applying the per-trip
cost to the estimated number of trips generated by the proposed development, ensuring that
new growth pays only its fair and proportionate share of roadway improvements from which it
benefits.

The standard for Level of Service (LOS) for roadways and intersections is based on a letter-
grade system that rates a given road within the range of service from “A” to “F.” Each letter in
the system is defined in the official Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board,
1985) and represents a category of quality of service, as described below:

• A: free-flow conditions, excellent mobility, a high degree of driver freedom, and a
superior level of comfort
• B: stable traffic flow with a slight reduction in maneuvering freedom; desired travel
speeds are largely unaffected.
• C: stable flow; marks the onset of noticeable interactions among users; more
constrained speed selection and maneuverability; declining overall comfort
• D: high traffic density with stable flow; travel speeds and maneuvering freedom are
significantly restricted, resulting in reduced comfort; greater potential for operational
deficiencies
• E: operating conditions at or near roadway capacity; low, relatively uniform speeds;
extremely limited maneuverability; poor comfort; high driver frustration; unstable
traffic operations

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
70

• F: forced or breakdown flow conditions; traffic demand exceeds roadway capacity;
formation of queue; increased frequency of stop-and-go traffic; arrival flows that exceed
discharge capacity

Factors contributing to the traffic volume that impacts the Level of Service include roadway
access, topography, size, type, and signalization.

Roadway capacity is highly correlated with the Level of Service that a given roadway provides.
The following table presents the LOS standard applicable to each of the road improvement
projects that are eligible for the impact fee program, along with some other relevant project
details. It is important to note that while the City of Stockbridge has several other
transportational projects, only those that directly increase roadway capacity and reduce
congestion are included in the following table, according to the standards as provided by the
Georgia Department of Community Affairs.

Table 19 - Roadway Capacity Data
Roadway Existing Build LOS Existing Build Existing At Build
Project Description Classification Facility Type Facility Type Standard Year Year Capacity Capacity
Country Club Dr - Traffic
and Safety Enhancements Local 4 lanes (undivided) 3 lanes (undivided) E 2025 2026 1,200 1,000
Rock Quarry Rd - Extension Minor Arterial N/A 2 lanes (undivided) N/A 2025 2027 0 7,152
Rock Quarry Rd - Widening Minor Arterial 2 lanes (undivided) 4 lanes (divided) D 2025 2026 12,130 25,630

For impact fee purposes, the City has established its Level of Service (LOS) for road
improvements at LOS “D” or LOS “E.” Road improvement projects provide proportional benefits
to both current and future traffic, as relieving over-capacity conditions improves mobility for all
users. For example, projected growth through 2050 will represent a defined share of total
traffic, and new development is responsible for covering that portion of road improvement
costs.

The cost impact of traffic originating outside Stockbridge is partially offset by state and federal
funding. Therefore, the net cost of road projects attributable to Stockbridge reflects, in
approximate proportion, the travel impact of local residents, commuters, and visitors traveling
to the city for work, shopping, business, or recreation.

Accordingly, the road impact fee is calculated by dividing Stockbridge’s share of improvement
costs by total traffic generated within the city in 2050, resulting in a cost-per-trip rate. This rate
is then applied to the trips generated by new development. For individual land uses, the cost-
per-trip is multiplied by the expected number of trips associated with the development at the

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
71

time of building permit issuance, ensuring that new growth pays its fair share of the road
improvements that serve it.

Level of Service

Future demand for road improvement projects is projected using the anticipated growth in the
City’s day-night population from 2025-2050. Since the City’s road network is equally available to
all members of the day-night population regardless of location, the City is the single service
area for forecasting the Level of Service (LOS) for road improvement projects. As population
increases, demand for roadway capacity, traffic circulation, and overall transportation system
performance is expected to rise proportionally. The City has established roadway LOS to define
the minimum acceptable operating conditions necessary to maintain a safe and efficient
transportation network. Based on existing conditions, portions of the roadway system currently
operate below the adopted LOS standards, indicating capacity constraints under present traffic
volumes. Applying the adopted LOS standards to the projected 2050 population provides a
basis for estimating future transportation demand and identifying growth-related roadway
capital improvements needed to increase capacity, enhance connectivity, and maintain
acceptable levels of service as population growth occurs.
Level of Service Forecast Calculation Methodology

This section outlines the Level of Service (LOS) Forecast Calculation Methodology used to
evaluate roadway conditions and identify future transportation needs within the Capital
Improvements Element (CIE) Plan. The methodology provides a consistent, data-driven
approach for assessing existing and projected traffic conditions, accounting for anticipated
growth, travel demand, and roadway capacity. By establishing how LOS is measured and
forecast over the planning horizon, this framework supports transparent decision-making and
helps ensure that proposed road improvement projects are appropriately timed, prioritized,
and scaled to maintain adopted service standards as development occurs.

The City of Stockbridge forecasted its expected Level of Service for 2050 by estimating the
increase in the number of primary trip ends generated by new residential and non-residential
developments. Transportation engineers quantitatively recognize increased traffic added to a
network in terms of “trips,” a route with an origin and a destination, respectively known as “trip
ends.” The term “primary trip” is distinguished from two other trip types: pass-by trips and
diverted trips, whose descriptions are included below:

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
72

• Primary Trip: A route whereby a vehicle travels from its original beginning to its
intended destination. Driving from home to work is a common example of a primary
trip.
• Pass-By Trip: A route whereby a vehicle travels from its original beginning to its
intended destination and stops at an intermediate location during its journey. Driving
from home to work while stopping for gas along the way is a common example of a
pass-by trip.
• Diverted Trip: An alternative route to the usual, primary route that a vehicle travels
between its origin and destination. The vehicle also stops at an intermediate location
along the alternative route.

It is important to note that only primary trip ends add vehicles to the road network. The other
trip types describe the same set of vehicles travelling from their original beginning to their
intended destination. As such, these trip types result in different trips that are irrelevant for
predicting future traffic congestion. For instance, a trip consisting of stops at home, a daycare
facility, and work has two primary trip ends—i.e., from home to work—and two pass-by or
diverted trip ends— i.e., the daycare facility as an intermediary location between home and
work, respectively. In this case, counting the primary trip alongside the latter trips as an
estimate for traffic congestion inflates the aggregate trip count, since the latter trips consider
the same vehicle and its primary trip ends.

Estimating the increase in the number of primary trip ends generated by new developments
necessitates the further categorization of trip types—that is, residential trips and non-
residential trips. Residential trips have either its original beginning or the intended destination
as a residential location, whereas non-residential trips have a non-residential location as either.
This dichotomy allows the City of Stockbridge to forecast the amount of traffic generated by
future increases in the number of housing units—i.e., generated residential trips—and the
number of employees—i.e., generated non-residential trips. Collectively, these generated trips
facilitate the estimation of the total number of trips generated from new development.

Residential Trip Generation

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) calculates average trip generation rates that
differentiate between “single-family detached housing” and “apartments.” The categories of
housing that the City of Stockbridge records broadly include “single-family units” and “multi-
family units,” which are shown in the table below:

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
73

Table 20- Residential Units by Type (2025-2050)

Total Number Total Increase Total Number
of Units (2025) Percent (2025-2050) of Units (2050)
Single-Family 9,756 63.78% 5,344 15,100
Multi-Family 5,540 36.22% 3,035 8,575
Total 15,296 1 8,379 23,675

(Table X)

The 2025 breakdown of housing unit types by category are drawn from a recent
intradepartmental survey of housing units, dated as of December 2025. All other figures were
generated as either (1) proportions of other figures in the table or (2) figures from past tables.
The table reveals that the City of Stockbridge will experience an increase of 8,379 housing units,
with many new units classified as “single-family”.

The table below shows that amount of traffic generated by the city’s current housing options,
along with the amount of growth that will be generated in 2050.

Table 21- Residential Trip Generation (2025-2050)

ADT Trip 2025 2025 ADT 2050 2050 ADT Increase % New Growth
Ends Units Trip Ends Units Trip Ends (2025-2050) Trip Ends
Single-Family 9.52 9,756 92,878 15,100 143,752 50,874
Multi-Family 6.65 5,540 36,841 8,575 57,024 20,183
Total 15,296 129,719 23,675 200,776 71,057 54.78%

The Average Daily Trip (ADT) includes total trips to and from work on a normal weekday and is
based on data gathered from the ITE across multiple traffic studies, 350 for single-family and 86
for apartments. The term “trip end” refers to traffic leaving from and coming to a housing unit.
By 2050, the City of Stockbridge expects that the future increase in trip ends will represent
54.78% of all residential trips generated in the city.

Non-Residential Trip Generation

Since detailed information on business types within the city is not readily available, estimating
traffic generated by businesses in Stockbridge is more complex than for residential trips.
Additionally, while employment forecasts exist, data on floor area by specific use is limited.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
74

An alternative method for calculating non-residential trips is to use the average trips generated
per employee. These trips include not only those made by employees but also trips by
customers and other individuals who visit, support, or are served by the business in some
capacity. Like the former method, relevant data, and other associated resources—such as ITE
data for individual uses that relate to the total number of trips generated per employee—are
limited. However, other planning teams from other municipalities that have a heavy mixed-use
developmental emphasis, such as the City of Atlanta and the City of Savannah, have already
performed similar computations, and thus, the City of Stockbridge has adopted the ITE trips per
employee figures and subsequent average ADT values for the non-residential categories of
“Commercial & Services” and “Industrial,” respectively, from the City of Savannah.

The table below highlights this adoption, displaying average ADT values of 23.95 for trips
involving commercial use and 4.21 for trips involving industrial use. From these totals, trips
generated by city residents commuting to and from work are subtracted, as these have already
been accounted for in the residential trip generation calculations. The table also demonstrates
with the growth of the number of employees from 2025 to 2050 and its subsequent growth in
trip ends.

Table 22 - Non-Residential Trip Generation (2025-2050)

Average 2025 2025 2050 2050 Increase % New Growth
ADT Employees Trip Ends Employees Trip Ends (2025-2050) Trip Ends
Commercial & Services 23.95 21,406 512,674 35,035 839,078 326,404
Industrial 4.21 2,919 12,289 4,777 20,114 7,825
Total 24,325 524,963 39,812 859,192 334,229
Less: Internal Commutes
at 40.06% -33,894 -48,702 -11,829
Net Non-Residential Ends 491,069 810,490 322,400 65.65%

Summary Tables

Amalgamating both the residential and non-residential trips generated from 2025 to 2050
yields the following figures that represent all trips by land use, which includes pass-by and
diverted trips.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
75

Table 23 - Average Daily Trip Ends (2025-2050)

% New Growth
2025 2050 Increase Trip Ends
Residential Trips 129,719 200,776 71,057
Non-Residential Trips 491,069 859,192 491,069
Less: Internal Commutes -33,894 -48,702 -14,808
Net Trip Ends 586,894 1,011,266 547,318 93.26%

Removing pass-by and diverted trips yields the following figures, which represent primary trip
ends generated by existing and future traffic. It is important to note that the percentage of
each use type that is considered “primary” has been adopted from former, similar analyses
conducted by the City of Savannah due to the unavailability of relevant data and the identicality
of the respective urban planning emphases of the Cities of Savannah and Stockbridge.

Table 24 - Primary Daily Trip Ends (2025-2050)

% New Growth
% Primary Primary Trip Ends Primary Trip
Trip Ends 2025 2050 Increase Ends
Residential Trips 100% 129,719 200,776 71,057
Commercial & Services 51% 261,464 427,930 166,466
Industrial 92% 11,306 18,505 7,199
Less: Internal Communities -33,894 -48,702 -14,808
Net New Primary Trip Ends 368,595 598,509 229,914 62.38%

Overall, new residents and business within the City of Stockbridge will generate 62.38% of all
vehicles on the city’s roads. Therefore, the equitable cost to the City for providing road
improvements to meet the current and prospective traffic demand cannot exceed this
percentage.
Relationship to Capital Improvements and Impact Fees

The following table outlines the costs of roadway improvement projects, including the
respective portions of costs that will be covered by impact fee funds. The percentage featured
under the “% Impact Fee Eligible” column is the percentage of prospective traffic congestion
that is attributable to new growth from 2025 to 2050. The total city cost of the projects are
dated as of 2025 and are in the City of Stockbridge’s approved FY2026 budget. The Net Present
Value (NPV) of the project is determined by considering the cumulative inflationary costs, as
defined by the Engineering News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI), from 2025 to the

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
76

expected year of completion. The “New Cost Growth” is the dollar amount of the NPV that is
eligible for impact fees for a given project. In total, approximately $4,427,852.70 worth of
prospective road improvement projects is eligible for impact fees.

Table 25 - Stockbridge Road Improvement Projects with Eligible Cost
Year of Net Present % Impact Fee New Growth
Project Description Total City Cost Completion Value (NPV) Eligible Cost
Country Club Dr - Traffic
and Safety Enhancements $ 1,000,000.00 2026 $ 1,010,937.11 62.38% $ 630,579.89
Rock Quarry Rd - Extension $ 2,000,000.00 2027 $ 2,043,987.70 62.38% $ 1,274,953.23
Rock Quarry Rd - Widening $ 4,000,000.00 2026 $ 4,043,748.46 62.38% $ 2,522,319.57
Total $ 7,000,000.00 $ 7,098,673.27 $ 4,427,852.70

Scheduling Individual Costs
The total estimated cost of each project in the table will be covered during the same year as its
year of completion. Thus, the widening of Rock Quarry Road and the installation of traffic and
safety enhancements along Country Club Drive will receive impact fee funds during 2026, and
the extension of Rock Quarry Road will receive its designated funds during 2027.

Future Costs
Credit Calculation

A credit is calculated for this category of public facilities. The calculation assumes that the City
will fund its share of non-eligible road improvement costs through General Fund revenues. As a
result, the credit is based on the future property tax contributions to the General Fund
attributable to new development. For purposes of calculating this credit, the total non-eligible
project costs are presented in the year in which the expenditures are expected to be incurred.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
77

Table 26 -Table Tax Credit (Road Improvements)
Inelibigle Funding Property Contribution from
Year Required (NPV) Tax Credit New Growth
2025 7.58%
2026 $ 1,901,786.11 10.86% $ 206,560.82
2027 $ 769,034.46 14.58% $ 112,128.73
2028 16.05%
2029 17.47%
2030 18.84%
2031 20.16%
2032 21.45%
2033 22.69%
2034 23.90%
2035 25.06%
2036 26.19%
2037 27.29%
2038 28.36%
2039 29.39%
2040 30.40%
2041 31.38%
2042 32.33%
2043 33.25%
2044 34.15%
2045 35.03%
2046 35.88%
2047 36.71%
2048 37.52%
2049 38.31%
2050 39.08%
Total New
Growth Contribution $ 318,689.55

It is important to note that the figures in the “Property Tax Credit” column represent the
percentage of property tax revenue that the City expects to be generated from new growth and
development. These figures account for the fact that some projects included in the impact fee
schedule are not 100% impact fee eligible—which occurs because certain projects will also
serve existing development, requiring alternative revenue sources, such as property taxes, to
fund the portion of project costs attributable to that development. Under typical
circumstances, revenues generated by existing development would be used to pay its
proportionate share of these costs. However, as new growth and development come to the City
of Stockbridge, it will also generate tax revenue. To the extent that new development
contributes tax revenues toward non-eligible portions of impact fee projects, a credit must be
applied to reflect this allocation and to ensure that new growth does not pay more than its
proportionate share of total project costs.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
78

The table below shows the estimated tax base projections for the City of Stockbridge, according
to the prospective total value added by impact fee eligible new growth and development
through 2050. Homestead and other exemptions, along with employment increases in job types
that are not subjected to impact fees, are not considered in the following figures.

Table 27- New Growth Added Value (City of Stockbridge)
Residential Non-Residential
Total New Added Added Total Annual
Housing Housing Assessed Total New Assessed Added
Year Units Units Value Employees Employees Value Assessed Value
2024 15,143 153 $ 8,362,827.00 22,224 2,101 $ 74,116,727.18 $ 82,479,554.18
2025 15,296 153 $ 8,362,827.00 24,325 2,101 $ 74,116,727.18 $ 82,479,554.18
2026 15,715 419 $ 22,902,121.00 26,426 2,101 $ 74,116,727.18 $ 97,018,848.18
2027 16,047 332 $ 18,146,788.00 26,985 559 $ 19,719,776.53 $ 37,866,564.53
2028 16,378 331 $ 18,092,129.00 27,542 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,741,351.77
2029 16,710 332 $ 18,146,788.00 28,100 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2030 17,042 332 $ 18,146,788.00 28,657 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,796,010.77
2031 17,373 331 $ 18,092,129.00 29,215 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,776,628.65
2032 17,705 332 $ 18,146,788.00 29,773 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2033 18,037 332 $ 18,146,788.00 30,331 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2034 18,368 331 $ 18,092,129.00 30,889 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,776,628.65
2035 18,700 332 $ 18,146,788.00 31,446 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,796,010.77
2036 19,032 332 $ 18,146,788.00 32,004 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2037 19,364 332 $ 18,146,788.00 32,562 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2038 19,695 331 $ 18,092,129.00 33,119 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,741,351.77
2039 20,027 332 $ 18,146,788.00 33,677 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2040 20,358 331 $ 18,092,129.00 34,235 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,776,628.65
2041 20,690 332 $ 18,146,788.00 34,793 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2042 21,022 332 $ 18,146,788.00 35,351 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2043 21,353 331 $ 18,092,129.00 35,908 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,741,351.77
2044 21,685 332 $ 18,146,788.00 36,466 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2045 22,017 332 $ 18,146,788.00 37,023 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,796,010.77
2046 22,348 331 $ 18,092,129.00 37,581 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,776,628.65
2047 22,680 332 $ 18,146,788.00 38,139 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2048 23,012 332 $ 18,146,788.00 38,697 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2049 23,344 332 $ 18,146,788.00 39,255 558 $ 19,684,499.65 $ 37,831,287.65
2050 23,675 331 $ 18,092,129.00 39,812 557 $ 19,649,222.77 $ 37,741,351.77

The values in the “Added Assessed Value” columns for both residential and non-residential
properties were estimated using assessed values per housing unit and per employee,
respectively. The table below summarizes these values; the assessed value per housing unit is
$54,659.00, and the assessed value per employee is $35,276.88.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
79

Table 28 -Residential and Non-Residential Assessed Values per Unit
New Housing Value:
Assessed Value per
Housing Unit $ 54,659.00
Non-Residential Value:
Assessed Value per
Employee $ 35,276.88

The first figure considers both single-family and multi-family residential units. An inventory of
19 houses in the City of Stockbridge was sold in the past year according to qPublic, generating a
total investment of $6,186,200 and an investment-per-unit total of $325,589, as shown in the
following formula:

• Investment per Single-Family Unit [Stockbridge]
= Total Investment (2024-2025) ÷ Number of Houses Sold (2024-2025)
= $6,186,200 ÷ 19 houses
= $325,589 per Single-Family Unit [Stockbridge]

In addition, the average growth in the number of total units between 2024-2025 (1,097 units)
was multiplied by the estimated proportion of these units that are multi-family (78.91%) to
yield an approximate total of 829 multi-family units in the City of Stockbridge. The average
investment per multifamily unit was estimated by computing a ratio between the current
population of the City of Stockbridge and that of a city with a comparable residential emphasis
in mixed-use developments and balanced neighborhoods—i.e., City of Savannah—and applying
it to the latter’s average investment per multi-family unit. The key assumption of this
formulation is that the average investment per multi-family unit within a given municipality is
directly proportional to its population scale. Below is the formula that illustrates this
mathematical workflow:

• Investment per Multi-Family Unit [Stockbridge]
= Investment per Multi-Family Unit [Standard] × (Population [Stockbridge] ÷ Population
[Standard])
= $186,173 per Multi-Family Unit × (38,607 residents ÷ 148,808 residents)
= $48,301.04 per Multi-Family Unit [Stockbridge]

Collectively, the total investment produced an average per-unit tax assessment value of
$54,659.00 at 40% across both single-family and multi-family units.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
80

Non-residential value is calculated as the assessed value of all commercial, industrial, and utility
property in the 2025 City Digest, per employee. Given the city’s approximate 24,000 jobs,
strong commercial presence, significant daily in-commuting, moderate total population, and
heavy emphasis on mixed use developments; the City reasons that roughly 45% of the total
assessed value of all parcels in the City are non-residential. This percentage is applied to the
City’s 2025 budgeted property tax revenue ($7,189,056) to generate an estimate for non-
residential tax revenue received in 2025. The following equation uses this value, along with city
millage (3.77) and the number of employees in 2025 (24,325) to produce the assessed value per
employee, which totaled $35,276.88 per employee.

• Assessed Value per Employee
= (2025 Nonresidential Tax Revenue × 1,000 ÷ Millage) ÷ (2025 Number of Employees)
= ((2025 Tax Revenue × Non-Residential Percent of Total Assessed Value) × 1,000 ÷
Millage) ÷ (2025 Number of Employees)
= (($7,189,056 × 0.45) × 1,000 ÷ 3.77) ÷ (24,325)
= $35,276.88 per employee

The value added is expressed as assessed value, which, as noted above, equals 40 percent of
market value. Property tax millage rates are applied to assessed value rather than appraised
value, and the assessed values are applied to new growth to calculate the annual increases in
assessed value attributable to growth.

The table below projects the City’s overall property tax base through 2045 by combining the
base-year tax digest with the annual increases in assessed property value generated by new
growth and development. The values in the table are expressed in current dollars and do not
reflect future reassessments or the effects of inflation on subsequent property sales.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
81

Table 29 -Stockbridge Tax Base Growth
Total City Total Annual Total Tax Base
Tax Base (Net 2025 Assessed Value Net City Tax Generated by Percent Generated
Year M&O Digest) Added Digest (40%) New Growth by New Growth
2024 $ 1,623,971,430.30
2025 $ 1,694,174,196.63 $ 70,202,766.33 $ 1,973,846,260.63 $ 149,687,369.76 7.58%
2026 $ 70,202,766.33 $ 2,044,049,026.95 $ 219,890,136.08 10.76%
2027 $ 82,577,938.20 $ 2,126,626,965.16 $ 302,468,074.29 14.22%
2028 $ 32,230,261.28 $ 2,158,857,226.44 $ 334,698,335.57 15.50%
2029 $ 32,123,685.99 $ 2,190,980,912.43 $ 366,822,021.56 16.74%
2030 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,223,181,147.67 $ 399,022,256.80 17.95%
2031 $ 32,170,209.19 $ 2,255,351,356.86 $ 431,192,465.99 19.12%
2032 $ 32,153,712.03 $ 2,287,505,068.90 $ 463,346,178.03 20.26%
2033 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,319,705,304.13 $ 495,546,413.26 21.36%
2034 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,351,905,539.37 $ 527,746,648.50 22.44%
2035 $ 32,153,712.03 $ 2,384,059,251.41 $ 559,900,360.54 23.49%
2036 $ 32,170,209.19 $ 2,416,229,460.60 $ 592,070,569.73 24.50%
2037 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,448,429,695.84 $ 624,270,804.97 25.50%
2038 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,480,629,931.07 $ 656,471,040.20 26.46%
2039 $ 32,123,685.99 $ 2,512,753,617.07 $ 688,594,726.20 27.40%
2040 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,544,953,852.30 $ 720,794,961.43 28.32%
2041 $ 32,153,712.03 $ 2,577,107,564.34 $ 752,948,673.47 29.22%
2042 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,609,307,799.58 $ 785,148,908.70 30.09%
2043 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,641,508,034.81 $ 817,349,143.94 30.94%
2044 $ 32,123,685.99 $ 2,673,631,720.80 $ 849,472,829.93 31.77%
2045 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,705,831,956.04 $ 881,673,065.17 32.58%
2046 $ 32,170,209.19 $ 2,738,002,165.24 $ 913,843,274.36 33.38%
2047 $ 32,153,712.03 $ 2,770,155,877.27 $ 945,996,986.40 34.15%
2048 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,802,356,112.51 $ 978,197,221.64 34.91%
2049 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,834,556,347.74 $ 1,010,397,456.87 35.65%
2050 $ 32,200,235.24 $ 2,866,756,582.98 $ 1,042,597,692.11 36.37%

The final two columns of the table also identify the portion of the total tax base attributable
solely to new growth and development. The annual contribution of new growth to the tax base
is used to calculate the credit for property taxes paid by new development toward portions of
impact fee projects that are not eligible for impact fee funding. These percentages are applied
to projects categorized under public safety and roadway service, as impact fees for these facility
categories are assessed on both residential and nonresidential development.

Because parks and recreation impact fees are assessed exclusively on residential uses, it
becomes necessary to consider the net increase in taxable value attributable to residential
properties only. Below is a table demonstrating these increases.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
82

Table 30 -Residential Tax Base Growth
Total Annual Total Tax Base
Total City Assessed Value Net City Tax Generated by Percent Generated
Year Tax Base Added Digest (40%) New Growth by New Growth
2024 $ 539,586,750.28
2025 $ 562,912,580.92 $ 23,325,830.64 $ 655,837,454.68 $ 49,735,678.78 7.58%
2026 $ 23,325,830.64 $ 679,163,285.32 $ 73,061,509.42 10.76%
2027 $ 27,437,650.99 $ 706,600,936.31 $ 100,499,160.41 14.22%
2028 $ 10,708,945.75 $ 717,309,882.06 $ 111,208,106.16 15.50%
2029 $ 10,673,534.65 $ 727,983,416.71 $ 121,881,640.80 16.74%
2030 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 738,682,385.89 $ 132,580,609.99 17.95%
2031 $ 10,688,992.62 $ 749,371,378.51 $ 143,269,602.61 19.12%
2032 $ 10,683,511.21 $ 760,054,889.73 $ 153,953,113.82 20.26%
2033 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 770,753,858.91 $ 164,652,083.01 21.36%
2034 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 781,452,828.10 $ 175,351,052.19 22.44%
2035 $ 10,683,511.21 $ 792,136,339.31 $ 186,034,563.41 23.49%
2036 $ 10,688,992.62 $ 802,825,331.93 $ 196,723,556.03 24.50%
2037 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 813,524,301.12 $ 207,422,525.21 25.50%
2038 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 824,223,270.30 $ 218,121,494.40 26.46%
2039 $ 10,673,534.65 $ 834,896,804.95 $ 228,795,029.05 27.40%
2040 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 845,595,774.14 $ 239,493,998.23 28.32%
2041 $ 10,683,511.21 $ 856,279,285.35 $ 250,177,509.45 29.22%
2042 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 866,978,254.53 $ 260,876,478.63 30.09%
2043 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 877,677,223.72 $ 271,575,447.82 30.94%
2044 $ 10,673,534.65 $ 888,350,758.37 $ 282,248,982.47 31.77%
2045 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 899,049,727.55 $ 292,947,951.65 32.58%
2046 $ 10,688,992.62 $ 909,738,720.17 $ 303,636,944.27 33.38%
2047 $ 10,683,511.21 $ 920,422,231.39 $ 314,320,455.49 34.15%
2048 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 931,121,200.57 $ 325,019,424.67 34.91%
2049 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 941,820,169.76 $ 335,718,393.86 35.65%
2050 $ 10,698,969.18 $ 952,519,138.94 $ 346,417,363.04 36.37%

Impact Cost Calculation

The table below presents the calculation of the net impact cost per primary trip end. To
determine this cost, the credit for anticipated future property tax revenues is subtracted from
the total cost eligible for impact fees, yielding a “net eligible road project cost.” Dividing this net
cost by the projected increase in primary trip ends from new growth and development
produces the “net impact cost per trip end.” An administrative fee of three percent is added to
this net impact cost, resulting in the maximum impact cost per trip end. This value serves as the
basis for calculating impact fees across all land use categories.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
83

Table 31 - Net Cost to Serve New Growth
Description Total
Eligible Cost of Road Projects $ 4,427,852.70
- Credit for Property Tax Contributions $ (318,689.55)
= Net Eligible Road Project Cost $ 4,109,163.15
÷ New Growth Primary Trip Ends 229,914
= Net Impact Cost per Trip End $ 17.87
+ 3% Administration Fee $ 0.54
= Average Cost per Trip End $ 18.41

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Roads

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are calculated by
multiplying the average number of trip ends by land use, as defined in the Trip Generation manual
from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), by the average cost per trip end, i.e., $18.41.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
84

PUBLIC SAFETY
Introduction

Public safety services within the City of Stockbridge are provided through the Stockbridge Police
Department (SPD). The SPD has only one precinct subdivided into four zones: Zones 1901, 1902,
1903, and 1904. The department also has a headquarters located near the city’s downtown
region and a new substation that is expected to open in December 2025.

Service Area

The City of Stockbridge is the sole service area that provides public safety services. All residents
and workers in the city have equal access to such services; thus, one service area suffices.

Level of Service
The “Level of Service” (LOS) is a quantitative measure that defines the relationship between
current service capacity and service demands and projects future infrastructural needs for the
future population of relevant geographical area. The LOS for public safety in the City of
Stockbridge is determined by inventorying the total square footage of all facilities used by SPD,
along with the total number of the department’s specialized vehicles that are used to serve the
city’s day-night population. The following table records the total inventory, and Table 32 shows
the calculations used to determine the LOS.

Table 32- SPD Current Inventory: Buildings and Specialized Vehicles (2025)
Type Description Location Square Footage Number
Building Police Headquarters 4545 North Henry Blvd 16800
Building Police Substation 1046 Chen Pkwy STE A 1400
Patrol Vehicles Patrol Vehicles 79
Specialized
Vehicles Enclosed Equipment Trailer 1

Total Square
Footage 18,200
Total Partrol
Vehicles 79
Total Specialized
Vehicles 1

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
85

Forecasts

Table 33 presents a simple methodology for forecasting prospective growth in the City of
Stockbridge for SPD facilities and vehicles.

Table 33- SPD Level of Service and New Growth Demand (2025-2050)
Current
Service Service Area New Growth
Facilities Population Level of Service Growth Demand

Square Foot of Day-Night Square Foot of New
Existing Square Day-Night Floor Population Floor Area
Feet Population Area per Person Increase to 2050 Completed
18,200 76,428 0.2381 43,706 10,407

Day-Night
Existing Patrol Day-Night Population New Specialized
Vehicles Population Vehicle per Person Increase to 2050 Vehicles Needed
79 76,428 0.001034 43,706 45.177

Day-Night
Existing Specialized Day-Night Population New Specialized
Vehicles Population Vehicle per Person Increase to 2050 Vehicles Needed
1 76,428 0.000013 43,706 0.572

The total square footage of all facilities used by the SPD is divided by the 2025 day-night
population to generate an estimate for the number of square feet that “serves” each citizen
within the city. Then, this ratio is projected into 2050 by multiplying the ratio by the difference
of the prospective 2025 day-night population from the current one, thus yielding an estimated
required growth of roughly 10,407 square feet across all PD facilities. An identical methodology
is also applied to the number of existing patrol vehicles and specialized vehicles; a ratio relative
to the current day-night population is calculated and then multiplied by the prospective
increase in day-night population by 2050 to yield approximations of 45.18 more patrol vehicles
and 0.57 more specialized vehicles. Since only whole vehicles can be purchased, the quantity is
rounded up to demonstrate that the impact fees may cover the costs of purchasing 45 patrol
vehicles, along with 17% of the cost of another patrol vehicle and 57% of the cost of a
specialized vehicle.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
86

The building area required to meet the growth of the city’s prospective day-night population—
that is, 10,407—is 100% eligible for impact fees. The square footage may be allocated across
future projects that increase building area, which includes the following: construction of a new
building, expansion of an existing building, and replacement of an existing building. It is
important to note that in the case of replacing an existing building, impact fees would only
cover the difference in square footage between the former and new buildings. For instance, if
SPD replaced its police headquarters with a building that is 20,00 square feet, then only the
difference in square footage—1,800 square feet—is impact fee eligible.

Future Costs
There are four categories of prospective costs: those for the development of an exterior car
port and storage building for the police headquarters, those for additional building area, those
for patrol vehicles, and those for specialized vehicles. The estimated cost for the first category
in 2025 dollars is already outlined in the city’s proposed FY2026 budget, and the estimated cost
of expanding existing buildings is based on average cost used by the City of Milton, Georgia, for
the same category. Vehicle costs are based on prevailing rates for similar vehicles purchased by
other Georgia municipalities like Savannah and Milton.

Table 34 -Stockbridge Facility Costs to Meet Future Demand Commented [VG2]: 30% in budget since 2022. and
forecast future years through 2030. reference the budget
Square % Impact Total Impact Net Present
Descriptions Footage Number Unit Cost Total Cost Fee Eligible Fee Eligible Value
Exterior Car
Port/Storage
Building for
Police Headquarters 2,080 $ 57.69 $ 120,000.00 100% $ 120,000.00 $ 150,990.68
Future
Building
Expansion 8,327 $ 694.00 $ 5,778,938.00 100% $ 5,778,938.00 $ 7,457,327.50
Patrol Vehicles 46 $ 78,000.00 $ 3,588,000.00 98.21% $ 3,523,791.96 $ 4,599,543.14
Specialized
Vehice #1 1 $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 57.19% $ 71,482.31 $ 90,067.71
Totals $ 9,611,938.00 $ 9,494,212.27 $ 12,297,929.02

The Net Present Value (NPV) of the growth-related share of future capital improvements—that
is, the portion eligible for impact fee funding—is calculated using a standardized cost-
adjustment approach. Because the exact timing of construction for the additional building area
and the acquisition of vehicles needed to serve future demand has not been scheduled, an
average implementation year of 2035 is assumed. This assumption reflects that some

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
87

improvements will occur earlier at lower cost, while others will occur later at higher cost, with
the effects balancing over time. The NPV of impact-fee-eligible building costs is calculated by
escalating current cost estimates to the average year of 2035 using the Engineering News-
Record 10-year average Building Cost Inflation (BCI) rate and then discounting those projected
costs back to present value using the net discount rate. The NPV of vehicle costs is calculated
using the same methodology, except that current vehicle cost estimates are escalated using the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather than BCI and then discounted to present value using the net
discount rate.

Scheduling Individual Capital Projects
Though the exact project details, such as implementation years, cannot be identified with
certainty over the next 25 years, the table below does provide a tentative plan of system
improvements that draw from the previous table describing the eligibility of projects for impact
fees. It is also important to note that the dates will be implemented as the City of Stockbridge
adopts its budget each year. Furthermore, the number of facilities and the nature of facility
expansions may vary from the figures shown in the following table. Notwithstanding, at least
some of the additional building areas and vehicles are eligible for impact fees if they do not
exceed their respective thresholds: 10,407 square feet for buildings, 46 patrol vehicles, and one
specialized vehicle.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
88

Table 35 -Schedule of Police Department Capital Improvements
Day-Night Population Facility
Cumultative Addition Patrol Specialized % Impact Fee
Year Total Additions (sq ft) Vehicles Vehicles Eligible
2025 76,428
2026 79,742 3,314 1 57%
2027 81,427 1,685 2,080
2028 83,108 1,681
2029 84,792 1,684
2030 86,474 1,682 10 100%
2031 88,157 1,683 2,081 100%
2032 89,841 1,684
2033 91,524 1,683
2034 93,207 1,683
2035 94,889 1,682 9 100%
2036 96,573 1,684 2,081 100%
2037 98,257 1,684
2038 99,938 1,681
2039 101,622 1,684
2040 103,304 1,682 8 100%
2041 104,988 1,684 2,081 100%
2042 106,672 1,684
2043 108,353 1,681
2044 110,037 1,684
2045 111,719 1,682 9 100%
2046 113,402 1,683 2,081 100%
2047 115,086 1,684
2048 116,769 1,683
2049 118,453 1,684
2050 120,134 1,681 10 91.77%
Totals 10,404 46 1

It is important to note that the yearly budget for the Police Department has been steadily
increasing since 2022, and the City anticipates the trend to continue through 2030. The chart
below illustrates this trend, highlighting its sustainable logarithmic pattern:

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
89

Figure 2 - Stockbridge Police Department Yearly Budget (2022-2025)

Noting the logarithmic regression model’s strength, as indicated by the nearly perfect R-
squared value, the City can reasonably estimate the budget of the Police Department through
2030. Below is a table showing such estimates:

Table 36 - Stockbridge Police Department: Proposed and Projected Total Budget (2022-2030)
OBSERVATIONS AND ADJUSTED PREDICTIONS LOGARITHMIC REGRESSION MODEL
Year Total Budget Yearly Difference Total Budget Yearly Difference Estimated Budget Percent
(Absolute) (Proposed) (Proposed) (Actual) (Actual) (Proposed) Error
2022 $ 3,611,296.25 $ 4,435,360.37 $ 4,000,000.00 -10.76%
2023 $ 6,139,881.31 $ 2,528,585.06 $ 6,490,406.49 $ 2,055,046.12 $ 6,772,588.72 -10.30%
2024 $ 8,200,000.00 $ 2,060,118.69 $ 2,859,419.85 $ (3,630,986.64) $ 8,394,449.15 -2.37%
2025 $ 8,685,290.00 $ 485,290.00 $ 5,782,002.24 $ 2,922,582.39 $ 9,545,177.44 -9.90%
2026 $ 10,182,808.25 $ 1,497,518.25 $ 10,437,751.65 -2.50%
2027 $ 10,642,859.33 $ 460,051.08 $ 11,167,037.88 -4.93%
2028 $ 11,230,518.84 $ 587,659.51 $ 11,783,640.60 -4.93%
2029 $ 11,739,572.66 $ 509,053.82 $ 12,317,766.17 -4.93%
2030 $ 12,188,589.95 $ 449,017.29 $ 12,788,898.31 -4.93%
Logarithmic
Coefficient 4,000,000
Constant 4,000,000

To estimate the total proposed budgets for 2027-2030 respectively, such budgets are calculated
for 2022-2030 using the logarithmic regression model. Then, percent error statistics are
generated for each year from 2022-2026, as shown in the rightmost column of the table above.
An unweighted average is calculated for the last three years, since these figures do not consider
the low-end extreme percent error values from 2022 and 2023 and are, therefore, more

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
90

reliable for estimating the accuracy of the model for future predictions. The average, 4.93%,
reveals that the model tends to overestimate the proposed budget by roughly 5%. This trend is
subsequently extrapolated onto the future years, and the total proposed budgets for 2027-
2030 are thus estimated. The resulting figures show that the Police Department has a broader
financial bandwidth to pay off the cost of the portions of public safety projects that are
ineligible to receive impact fee funds.

Credit Calculation

Due to the presence of a specialized vehicle that is not fully eligible for impact fees, there must
be a credit calculation conducted for the “public safety” category. Table 10 demonstrates the
anticipated property tax contributions from new growth towards non-eligible costs.

Table 37 - New Growth Contribution from Property Taxes
Ineligible Property Contribution
Funding Tax from
Year Required (NPV) Credit New Growth
2035 $ 67,432.289 23.49% $ 15,836.59

In Table 10, the Net Present Value (NPV) is the amount paid from taxes to cover costs that are
not eligible for impact fee funding. Due to the uncertainty of the implementation of the impact-
fee-funded projects, 2035 is designated as the “average” year. It is also important to note that
the City assumes that it will its financial obligations toward non-eligible project costs through
general fund expenditures. As such, the credit is based on future property tax contributions into
the general fund that will be produced by new growth and development.

Impact Fee Calculation Cost

There are two types of impact fees that the City intends to charge to fund projects involving
public safety: (1) the maximum impact fee per day-night person and (2) the average impact fee
per housing unit. Table 11 calculates the first figure, based on the anticipated increase in day-
night population from 2025 to 2050.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
91

Table 38 -Cost to Serve New Growth (per Person)

Description Total
Eligible Cost of Public Safety Projects $ 12,297,929.02
– Credit for Tax Contributions $ (15,836.59)
= Total Net Eligible Public Safety Project Costs $ 12,282,092.44
÷ Day-Night Pop Increase in Service Area (2025-2050) 43,706
= Net Cost per Person $ 281.02
+ 3% Administration Fee $ 8.43
= Maximum Impact Fee per Day-Night Person $ 289.45

It is important to note that a 3% administration fee supplements the net impact cost. This fee,
added to the net impact cost, yields the maximum impact fee that could be charged per person.
The resulting figure will be used to calculate impact fees for all non-residential land uses.

For residential uses, on the other hand, Table 12 demonstrates the method used to calculate
the average impact fee per housing unit.

Table 39 - Calculation of Housing Unit Fee

Description Total
Residential Population Increase (2025-2050) 19,840
÷ Day-Night Pop Increase in Service Area (2025-2050) 43,706
= Residential Increase as % of Total Increase 45.3942%
Total Net Project Costs $ 12,297,929.02
× Residential Increase = $ 5,582,549.58
÷ New Housing Units (2025-2050) 8,379
= Net Impact Fee per Housing Unit $ 666.25
+ 3% Administration Fee $ 19.99
= Average Impact Fee per Housing Unit $ 686.24

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule – Public Safety

The table below summarizes the maximum road improvement impact fees that may be assessed
in Stockbridge based on the analyses presented in this chapter. These fees are either (1) derived
by multiplying the relevant calculated impact fee for non-residential land uses by the number of
persons (“Employees”) per unit of measure for a given land use or (2) directly established for
residential land uses based on the calculated impact fee for dwelling units.

Non-Residential Impact Fee:
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × Calculated Impact Fee per Resident
= Number of Employees per Unit of Measure × $289.45

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
92

Residential Impact Fee:
= Calculated Impact Fee per Dwelling Unit = $686.24

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
93

SHORT-TERM WORK PROGRAM
The Schedule of Improvements serves as a roadmap for all capital improvement projects to be
funded, in whole or in part, by impact fees over the next five years, beginning with the current
year. This schedule should reflect any updates to previously listed projects—such as revised
cost estimates, changes in funding sources, adjustments to construction timelines, or
modifications to project scope. In addition, it must include a new fifth-year projection of
improvements to ensure comprehensive planning for projects supported by impact fees.

Schedule of Improvements

Table 40 - Schedule of EligImprovements
(1) Project (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Start Completion Estimated Sources Sponsor
Public Service Area % Eligible
Date Date Project Cost of Funds
Facility Type for Impact
(& Share)
Fees
Public Public Works Citywide 2018 2026 $2,704,087 100% Impact Public
Safety Facilities Fees Works
Public Vehicle Citywide 2026 2028 $5,640,400 100% Impact Police
Safety Acquisition Fees
Roads LMIG- Citywide 2024 2028 $11,097,119 59% Impact Public
Sidewalk Fees Works
Resurface
Roads Davis Rd Davis Rd 2026 2026 $2,500,000 100% Impact Public
Sidewalk Area Fees Works
Project
Parks & Brush Creek Brush Creek 2026 2026 $2,500,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Trail Area Fees Works
Enhancemen
Parks & MLK Sr Downtown 2027 2027 $425,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Heritage Trail Fees Works
Spur
Parks & MLK Sr Downtown 2027 2027 $355,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Heritage Trail Fees Works
Enhancemen

Parks & Continuation Downtown 2027 2027 $625,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation of MLK Sr Fees Works
Trail

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
94

Parks & Trail Head Downtown 2027 2027 $500,000 75% Impact Public
Recreation Location MLK Fees Works
& Reeves
Creek

Roads Country Club Country 2026 2026 $1,000,000 100% Impact Public
Dr Traffic & Club Dr Area Fees Works
Safety
Enhancemen

Roads Burke St Burke St 2027 2027 $500,000 100% Impact Police
Sidewalks Fees
Roads Love St Love St 2027 2027 $500,000 100% Impact Public
Sidewalks Fees Works
Parks & Walt Walt 2028 2028 $3,000,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Stephens Stephens Rd Fees Works
Trail
Roads Downtown Downtown 2026 2026 $800,000 100% Impact Public
Pedestrian Fees Works
Bridge
Roads Campground Campgroun 2027 2027 $500,000 100% Impact Public
Road d Road Rd Fees Works
Sidewalk
Roads Rock Quarry Rock Quarry 2027 2027 $2,000,000 100% Impact Public
Road Rd Fees Works
Extension

Roads Rock Quarry Rock Quarry 2026 2026 $4,000,000 100% Impact Public
Road Rd Fees Works
Widening

Parks & Eagles Eagles 2027 2027 $540,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Landing Park Landing Fees Works
Land Area
Acquisition
Parks & Clark Park Clark Park 2024 2026 $789,685 78% Impact Public
Recreation Stream Fees Works
Restoration
Parks & N. Henry N Henry 2028 2028 $390,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Blvd Park Blvd. Fees Works
Land
Acquisition
Water SR138SR42 SR138/SR42 2026 2026 $735,000 100% Impact Public
Utility Fees Works
Relocation
GDOT

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
95

Sewer Clay Pipe Citywide 2024 2028 $17,546,000 66% Impact Public
Replacement Fees Works

Sewer Northbridge Northbridge 2027 2027 $2,030,100 100% Impact Public
Station Fees Works
Sanitary
Sewer
Rehabilitatio
Parks & Wayfinding Citywide 2026 2030 $1,600,000 50% Impact Public
Recreation (Digital Fees Works
&DeNyse
Signage)
Roads Alleway Downtown 2026 2030 $4,000,000 100% Impact Public
Project Area Fees Works
Downtown
Utility
Relocation
Community IT Upgrades Downtown 2026 2030 $1,500,000 100% Impact Public
Facilities to Chamber Area Fees Works
Community Burke Burke St 2026 2030 $25,000 100% Impact Public
Facilities Cemetery Fees Works
Gate
Community PD/City Hall Downtown 2026 2030 $4,000,000 100% Impact Public
Facilities Connection Area Fees Works
Center
Roads Public Works Citywide 2026 2030 $2,500,000 100% Impact Fees Public
Vehicles Works

Parks & Splash Downtown 2026 2026 $1,300,000 100% Impact Public
Recreation Pad/Park Area Fees Works
Design
Community Multipurpose Downtown 2026 2030 $10,000,000 100% Impact Public
Facilities Center Area Fees Works
Community Cultural Arts Downtown 2026 2030 $34,000,000 100% Impact Public
Facilities Center Area Fees Works

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
96

ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
The Annual Financial Report provides a transparent accounting of development impact fee
activity for the preceding fiscal year, as required by the Development Impact Fee Act (DIFA),
§36-71-8(c). Prepared as part of the municipality or county’s annual audit process, this report
ensures compliance with state regulations and supports informed decision-making for capital
planning.

Introduction
Prepared as part of the annual audit process, the Annual Financial Report provides a
transparent summary of impact fee activity for the preceding fiscal year. It includes:

• Impact fee fund balance carried forward from the prior fiscal year.

• Total impact fees collected during the last completed fiscal year.

• Impact fees expended, itemized by category of public facility and service area.

• Interest earned on impact fee accounts.

• Impact fees encumbered under contracts for specific capital improvements.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
97

Annual Impact Fee Financial Report – Fiscal Year 2025
Public Facility Category Administration Total
FY25 Parks & Water Wastewater Roads Public Cultural
Recreation Safety Facilities

Impact Fee $324,798 $271,491 $351,396 $248,495 0 0 $15,633 $1,211,813
Fund
Balance
2024

Impact Fees $460,275 $99,000 $132,000 $548,125 0 0 $31,546 $1,270,946
Collected

Sub-total $785,073 $99,000 $132,000 $796,620 0 0 $47,179 $1,859,872

Accrued 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Interest

Impact Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
refunds

Expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0

Impact Fee $785,073 $370,491 $483,396 $796,620 0 0 $47,179 $2,482,759
Balance
2025

Impact Fees $785,073 $370,491 $483,396 $796,620 0 0 $47,179 $2,482,759
Encumbers

*No funding from impact fees were expended for projects

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
98

GLOSSARY
Annual Financial Report Provides an overview of impact fees
collected, encumbered, and used by
category of public facility and service area
for the last completed fiscal year. The
financial report does not include
information for the current year

Capital Improvements An improvement with a useful life of ten
years or more, achieved through new
construction or other actions, which
increases the service capacity of a public
facility.
Capital Improvement Element (CIE) A component of the Comprehensive Plan
that establishes a multi-year schedule of
capital projects necessary to maintain
adopted Levels of Service (LOS) as growth
occurs.
Development Impact Fee Act (DIFA) Georgia law (O.C.G.A. §36-71-1 et seq.)
authorizing local governments to impose
impact fees on new development to
recover its proportionate share of the
cost of providing public facilities
necessary to serve growth.
Impact Fees Charges assessed on new development to
fund a proportionate share of capital
improvements required to maintain
adopted service levels.
Level of Service (LOS) A measurable standard that defines the
relationship between facility capacity and
demand, expressed in units such as acres
per 1,000 residents (parks), miles per
1,000 residents (trails), or gallons per
capita per day (water).
Service Area The geographic area within which a public
facility provides system-wide benefits and
for which impact fees are calculated. For

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
99

Stockbridge, most facilities operate on a
citywide service area basis.
Rational Nexus A principle requiring a clear connection
between new development, the need for
additional public facilities, and the
expenditure of impact fees on those
facilities.
Proportionality The requirement that impact fees reflect
only the share of capital improvement
costs attributable to new development,
excluding costs for existing deficiencies or
routine maintenance.
Growth-Related Costs The portion of capital improvement costs
necessary to expand system capacity to
serve projected population and
development growth, as distinguished
from costs to remedy existing
deficiencies.
Net Present Value (NPV) A financial calculation used to adjust
future capital costs to present-day
dollars, accounting for inflation and
discount rates. Applied in estimating
long-range impact fee eligibility for
projects with uncertain implementation
timing.
Trip Generation A transportation planning metric
estimating the number of vehicle trips
produced by a land use type, based on
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
data. Used to calculate roadway impact
fees.
Credits Financial offsets applied to impact fees to
account for other contributions by new
development toward non-eligible costs,
such as property tax revenues or prior
infrastructure investments.
Concurrency A planning principle ensuring that public
facilities are available at adopted service
levels when development occurs,
supported by impact fee funding for
capacity-expanding improvements.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
100

APPENDIX A:

TRANSMITTAL RESOLUTION

TRANSMITTAL RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge has prepared an annual update to a Capital Improvements
Element; and

WHEREAS, the annual update of the Capital Improvements Element was prepared in accordance
with the Development Impact Fee Compliance Requirements established by Georgia Department
of Community Affairs, and a Public Hearing was held on Month, Date, 2026 at City Hall.

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Mayor and the Council of the City of Stockbridge do hereby
submit the annual update of the Capital Improvements Element covering the five-year period
2026 - 2030 to the Atlanta Regional Commission for review, as per the requirements of the
Georgia Planning Act of 1989.

Adopted this 9th day of March, 2026.

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
101

APPENDIX B:
MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
FOR 2026

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
102

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule for 2026

Unit of Parks & Recreation
LAND USE Measure Employees ($)

Amusement Park per acre 0.002224 1.1832

Apartment per dwelling — 1331.0000

Apparel Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Arena per acre 0.001210311 0.6439

Athletic Club per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

Automobile Care Center service stall 0.001451 0.7719

Automobile Parts Sales per sq ft 0.00096 0.5107

Automobile Sales per sq ft 0.002486 1.3226

Baby Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Book Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Bowling Alley per sq ft 0.000362885 0.1931

Building Materials and Lumber Store per sq ft 0.000688 0.3660

Business Park per sq ft 0.003079 1.6380

Cemetery per acre 0.104242 55.4567

Church/Synagogue per sq ft 0.00038 0.2022

Clinic per sq ft 0.002705 1.4391

Condominium/Townhouse per dwelling — 1331.0000

Congregate Care Facility per dwelling — 1331.0000

Convenience Market (24-Hour) per sq ft 0.000653872 0.3479

Convenience Market (Regular Hours) per sq ft 0.000653872 0.3479

Corporate Headquarters Building per sq ft 0.003442 1.8311

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
103

Day Care Center per sq ft 0.002227 1.1848

Department Store per sq ft 0.002187 1.1635

Discount Club per sq ft 0.001318 0.7012

Drinking Place per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Drive-in Bank per sq ft 0.003066 1.6311

Electronics Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Elementary School per sq ft 0.0225 11.9700

Factory Outlet Center per sq ft 0.001318 0.7012

Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive Thru per sq ft 0.0105 5.5860

Fast-Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Free-Standing Discount Superstore per sq ft 0.002187 1.1635

Furniture Store per sq ft 0.000576 0.3064

Gas Station w/Convenience Market per sq ft 0.000296506 0.1577

Gas Station w/Convenience Market and Car
Wash per pump — -44.3545

Gasoline/Service Station per pump — 44.6700

General Heavy Industrial per sq ft 0.000664063 0.3533

General Light Industrial per sq ft 0.001542 0.8203

General Medical Professional Office Buildings per sq ft 0.004133 2.1988

Golf Course per acre 0.089189878 47.4490

Golf Driving Range per acre 0.089189878 47.4490

Hardware/Paint Store per sq ft 0.000291 0.1548

Health/Fitness Center per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

High School per sq ft 0.02225 11.8370

High-Cube Warehouse per sq ft 0.000653 0.3474

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
104

High-Turnover (sit-down) Restaurant per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Home Improvement Superstore per sq ft 0.000688 0.3660

Hospital per sq ft 0.002857 1.5199

Hotel Per Room 0.557183 296.4214

Industrial Park per sq ft 0.003079 1.6380

Junior/Community College student 0.000486866 0.2590

Library per sq ft 0.000486866 0.2590

Lodge/Fraternal Organization per member 0.001 0.5320

Manufacturing per sq ft 0.001892 1.0065

Medical-Dental Office Building per sq ft 0.004133 2.1988

Middle School/Junior High School student 0.02515 13.3798

Mini-Warehouse per sq ft 0.000339 0.1803

Motel Per Room 0.133095 70.8065

Movie Theater with Matinee per sq ft 0.001417 0.7538

Multipurpose Recreational Facility per acre 0.001058 0.5629

New Car Sales per sq ft 0.002486 1.3226

Nursery (Garden Center) per sq ft 0.00312 1.6598

Nursing Home per sq ft 0.002039 1.0847

Office Park per sq ft 0.003127 1.6636

Office Supply Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Pet Supply Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Pharmacy/Drugstore w/Drive Thru per sq ft 0.00167 0.8884

Pharmacy/Drugstore w/o Drive Thru per sq ft 0.001567 0.8336

Private School (K-12) per sq ft 0.02225 11.8370

Quality Restaurant per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
105

Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop Per Stall 0.004348 2.3131

Racquet Club per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

Recreational Community Center per sq ft 0.001058 0.5629

Research and Development Center per sq ft 0.003288 1.7492

Self-Service Car Wash per stall — 55.8400

Shopping Center per sq ft 0.002125 1.1305

Single Tenant Office Building per sq ft 0.003395 1.8061

Single-Family Detached Housing per dwelling — 1331.0000

Specialty Retail Center per sq ft 0.0721 38.3572

Sr. Adult Housing per dwelling — 1331.0000

Supermarket per sq ft 0.00214 1.1385

Tennis Courts per acre 0.000475 0.2527

Tire Store/Superstore per sq ft 0.00128 0.6810

Toy/Children's Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Truck Terminal per acre 0.000520833 0.2771

Variety Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Video Rental Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Walk-in Bank per sq ft 0.003066 1.6311

Warehousing per sq ft 0.000339 0.1803

Wholesale Market per sq ft 0.000189 0.1005

Wholesale Tire Shot per sq ft 0.00128 0.6810

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
106

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
102

Maximum Impact Fee Schedule for 2026

Unit of Parks & Recreation
LAND USE Measure Employees ($)

Amusement Park per acre 0.002224 1.1832

Apartment per dwelling — 1331.0000

Apparel Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Arena per acre 0.001210311 0.6439

Athletic Club per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

Automobile Care Center service stall 0.001451 0.7719

Automobile Parts Sales per sq ft 0.00096 0.5107

Automobile Sales per sq ft 0.002486 1.3226

Baby Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Book Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Bowling Alley per sq ft 0.000362885 0.1931

Building Materials and Lumber Store per sq ft 0.000688 0.3660

Business Park per sq ft 0.003079 1.6380

Cemetery per acre 0.104242 55.4567

Church/Synagogue per sq ft 0.00038 0.2022

Clinic per sq ft 0.002705 1.4391

Condominium/Townhouse per dwelling — 1331.0000

Congregate Care Facility per dwelling — 1331.0000

Convenience Market (24-Hour) per sq ft 0.000653872 0.3479

Convenience Market (Regular Hours) per sq ft 0.000653872 0.3479

Corporate Headquarters Building per sq ft 0.003442 1.8311

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
103

Day Care Center per sq ft 0.002227 1.1848

Department Store per sq ft 0.002187 1.1635

Discount Club per sq ft 0.001318 0.7012

Drinking Place per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Drive-in Bank per sq ft 0.003066 1.6311

Electronics Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Elementary School per sq ft 0.0225 11.9700

Factory Outlet Center per sq ft 0.001318 0.7012

Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive Thru per sq ft 0.0105 5.5860

Fast-Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Free-Standing Discount Superstore per sq ft 0.002187 1.1635

Furniture Store per sq ft 0.000576 0.3064

Gas Station w/Convenience Market per sq ft 0.000296506 0.1577

Gas Station w/Convenience Market and Car
Wash per pump — -44.3545

Gasoline/Service Station per pump — 44.6700

General Heavy Industrial per sq ft 0.000664063 0.3533

General Light Industrial per sq ft 0.001542 0.8203

General Medical Professional Office Buildings per sq ft 0.004133 2.1988

Golf Course per acre 0.089189878 47.4490

Golf Driving Range per acre 0.089189878 47.4490

Hardware/Paint Store per sq ft 0.000291 0.1548

Health/Fitness Center per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

High School per sq ft 0.02225 11.8370

High-Cube Warehouse per sq ft 0.000653 0.3474

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
104

High-Turnover (sit-down) Restaurant per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

Home Improvement Superstore per sq ft 0.000688 0.3660

Hospital per sq ft 0.002857 1.5199

Hotel Per Room 0.557183 296.4214

Industrial Park per sq ft 0.003079 1.6380

Junior/Community College student 0.000486866 0.2590

Library per sq ft 0.000486866 0.2590

Lodge/Fraternal Organization per member 0.001 0.5320

Manufacturing per sq ft 0.001892 1.0065

Medical-Dental Office Building per sq ft 0.004133 2.1988

Middle School/Junior High School student 0.02515 13.3798

Mini-Warehouse per sq ft 0.000339 0.1803

Motel Per Room 0.133095 70.8065

Movie Theater with Matinee per sq ft 0.001417 0.7538

Multipurpose Recreational Facility per acre 0.001058 0.5629

New Car Sales per sq ft 0.002486 1.3226

Nursery (Garden Center) per sq ft 0.00312 1.6598

Nursing Home per sq ft 0.002039 1.0847

Office Park per sq ft 0.003127 1.6636

Office Supply Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Pet Supply Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Pharmacy/Drugstore w/Drive Thru per sq ft 0.00167 0.8884

Pharmacy/Drugstore w/o Drive Thru per sq ft 0.001567 0.8336

Private School (K-12) per sq ft 0.02225 11.8370

Quality Restaurant per sq ft 0.005042 2.6823

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
105

Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop Per Stall 0.004348 2.3131

Racquet Club per sq ft 0.00475 2.5270

Recreational Community Center per sq ft 0.001058 0.5629

Research and Development Center per sq ft 0.003288 1.7492

Self-Service Car Wash per stall — 55.8400

Shopping Center per sq ft 0.002125 1.1305

Single Tenant Office Building per sq ft 0.003395 1.8061

Single-Family Detached Housing per dwelling — 1331.0000

Specialty Retail Center per sq ft 0.0721 38.3572

Sr. Adult Housing per dwelling — 1331.0000

Supermarket per sq ft 0.00214 1.1385

Tennis Courts per acre 0.000475 0.2527

Tire Store/Superstore per sq ft 0.00128 0.6810

Toy/Children's Superstore per sq ft 0.005356 2.8494

Truck Terminal per acre 0.000520833 0.2771

Variety Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Video Rental Store per sq ft 0.000666 0.3543

Walk-in Bank per sq ft 0.003066 1.6311

Warehousing per sq ft 0.000339 0.1803

Wholesale Market per sq ft 0.000189 0.1005

Wholesale Tire Shot per sq ft 0.00128 0.6810

City of Stockbridge, Georgia Capital Improvements Element, 2026 www.stockbridgega.org
Ryan Anderson,
Resolution to Adopt the
MPPA, CPM
Director, Community Capital Improvements
Element (CIE)
Development
City Council Meeting

Amendment
March 9, 2026
CIE Amendment Adoption
Purpose of Meeting
The meeting requests adoption of Stockbridge’s Capital Improvements Element to guide infrastructure
planning.

Strategic Infrastructure Planning
CIE amendment adoption enables strategic budgeting and scheduling for future city infrastructure and
service demands.

Local Government Compliance
Adopting the CIE ensures compliance with state laws and maintains eligibility for state programs and
grants.

Community Coordination
The City-specific CIE supports coordinated planning across services like parks, safety, and utilities.
Purpose of the Request
Request for Council Approval
Seeking City Council authorization to adopt the Capital Improvements Element as part of the
Comprehensive Plan amendment.

Transition to City-Specific CIE
Moving from Henry County’s plan to a tailored Stockbridge CIE reflecting local priorities and funding
needs.

Impact Fees and Compliance
Adoption of CIE enables lawful implementation of development impact fees supporting sustainable
growth.

Regulatory Review and Status
Approval includes transmitting CIE to state agencies to ensure compliance and maintain Qualified
Local Government status.
Background and Legal Framework
Legal Mandate for CIE
Georgia law requires local governments to adopt a Capital Improvements Element for impact fee
compliance and planning.

Role of Georgia DCA
The Georgia Department of Community Affairs sets compliance standards to maintain Qualified
Local Government status.

Local Planning Needs
Stockbridge’s expansion requires a city-specific CIE to address local infrastructure demands and
funding priorities.

Protection and Transparency
The legal framework ensures impact fees fund only growth-related projects and protect the city
from legal risks.
q The City’s current CIE is still based on the 1993 version and no
longer meets today’s state planning standards for impact fee
compliance.
q Georgia’s Development Impact Fee Act (DIFA) requires every Why the City
Requires a
local government to maintain a current, locally adopted CIE
within its Comprehensive Plan.
q A CIE must include projected infrastructure needs, a five‑year
schedule of improvements, and defined funding sources, which
mandate updating or amending older CIEs. CIE
q Creating a standalone CIE ensures Stockbridge’s plan reflects
city‑specific service areas, growth patterns, and capital needs
rather than outdated county-level assumptions.
Amendment
q The Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and Georgia DCA must
review and approve all CIE updates and amendments before
adoption, reinforcing the need for an updated, compliant
document.
What is the Capital Improvements Element
Amendment (CIE)?
The CIE is the City’s long‑range plan for building and funding major public
facilities.

It identifies the infrastructure needed to support population and economic
growth through 2050.

Required by Georgia’s Development Impact Fee Act to implement and collect
lawful impact fees.

Ensures the City maintains adopted service levels for parks, roads, water, sewer,
stormwater, public safety, and cultural facilities
The CIE Matters for Stockbridge
• Prepares Stockbridge for rapid growth. Our population is projected to increase by 53.9% by 2050, driving demand for
roads, parks, utilities, police services, and cultural facilities. The CIE ensures we stay ahead of that growth instead of
reacting to it.
• Supports the 2022–2023 annexation impacts. The annexation added 5,368 new residents and expanded our service
area dramatically. The CIE provides the roadmap to serve these new neighborhoods with proportional infrastructure.
• Ensures development pays its fair share. Impact fees generated through an adopted CIE shift the cost of growth away
from existing residents—protecting our taxpayers and preventing strain on the General Fund.
• Improves roads and mobility citywide. Growth will account for 62.38% of new traffic, making projects like Rock Quarry
Road improvements essential. The CIE lets us fund these needs equitably through impact fees.
• Strengthens public safety capacity. With projected day‑night population increases of 43,706, SPD will require expanded
facilities and additional vehicles. The CIE identifies exactly what is needed and ensures growth contributes to these
costs.
• Expands trails, parks, and quality‑of‑life amenities. The trail system alone needs 33.5 new miles to meet LOS
standards. The CIE allows us to build these improvements using growth-generated revenue.
• Maintains our State Qualified Local Government status. Adoption keeps Stockbridge eligible for state grants,
partnerships, and impact fee authority
The CIE Benefits to Stockbridge
• Protects the community from rising taxes. Without an adopted CIE,
Stockbridge would have to fund new growth entirely from property taxes,
SPLOST, or debt. The CIE ensures new development pays its proportional
share.
• Delivers better services where residents need them most. From parks to
police response times to water reliability, the CIE directs investments that
maintain our high service levels as the city grows.
• Promotes fairness and transparency. Every capital project is tied to a
documented need, cost estimate, and funding source—building public trust in
how we plan and spend.
• Supports economic development and quality of life. Well-planned
infrastructure makes Stockbridge more competitive for new businesses,
walkable neighborhoods, cultural amenities, and family-friendly community
spaces.
• Ensures orderly, responsible growth. The CIE guides project timing so
infrastructure is available before development causes strain—not after.
2022–2023 Annexation and
Growth Impacts
Population Growth from Annexation
Stockbridge's population rose by 5,368 residents in 2022, an 18.36%
increase due to annexation expanding city limits and services.

Infrastructure and Service Demands
Rapid growth pressures parks, trails, roads, water, sewer, and public
safety systems, requiring updated capital planning.

Capital Improvement Element (CIE) Importance
Updated CIE is crucial to address capacity gaps, prioritize needs, and
secure funding through impact fees amid annexation growth.

Future Population Projections
By 2050, Stockbridge population is projected to reach
approximately 56,647 residents, emphasizing long-term planning
needs.
Parks and Recreation Enhancements
The CIE plans upgrades like athletic fields, trail expansions, and
playground improvements to meet service standards and
resident needs.

CIE Highlights Trail Network Expansion
Trail system needs over 33 miles of expansion by 2050,
and including projects like Walt Stephens and MLK Sr. Heritage Trail
extensions.

Infrastructure Water and Sewer Capacity
Categories Projected system load increase demands water treatment and
sewer upgrades to support population growth by 2050.

Roadway and Public Safety Improvements
Road widening, pedestrian enhancements, and new public
safety facilities address congestion and service demands
through 2050.
Legal Compliance and Funding
Adoption ensures compliance with state requirements,
maintaining Qualified Local Government status and

Why
eligibility for grants and loans.

Impact Fees and Fiscal Stability

Adoption Timely adoption allows lawful collection of impact fees,
preventing reliance on general funds and minimizing
fiscal vulnerabilities.

Is Infrastructure and Growth Planning
The CIE integrates demographic data and infrastructure

Needed
needs into long-term planning, supporting growth
management and service delivery.

Now
Strategic Coordination and Budgeting
Adoption supports interdepartmental coordination and
aligns with capital budgeting cycles for effective project
scheduling.
Resolution Approval Request
Council is asked to approve the resolution adopting
the City of Stockbridge’s Capital Improvements
Element as part of the Comprehensive Plan.

Official Transmittal Authorization
Authorization requested to send the adopted CIE
Requested and supporting documents to regional and state
agencies for required review.

Council Administrative Implementation
Approval enables staff to integrate CIE into
planning, update schedules, and prepare for
Action reporting and impact fee collection.

Ensuring Compliance and Growth
Council action ensures compliance with state laws,
supports funding for growth, and positions the city
for future infrastructure projects.
Thank You
Ryan Anderson MPPA, CPM
Randerson@stockbridgega.org
TRANSMITTAL RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge has prepared an annual update to a Capital Improvements
Element; and

WHEREAS, the annual update of the Capital Improvements Element was prepared in accordance
with the Development Impact Fee Compliance Requirements established by Georgia Department
of Community Affairs, and a Public Hearing was held on Month, Date, 2026 at City Hall.

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Mayor and the Council of the City of Stockbridge do hereby
submit the annual update of the Capital Improvements Element covering the five-year period
2026 - 2030 to the Atlanta Regional Commission for review, as per the requirements of the
Georgia Planning Act of 1989.

Adopted this 9th day of March, 2026.
MARCH 9, 2026

Ryan Anderson

Community Development

STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET.
(Council District 4) 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 aligning the
corridor with a name that reflects the community’s historical and cultural values. Applicant: City of Stockbridge.

North Lee Street and South Lee Street are bordered by some sixteen (16) parcels, consisting of residential properties,
City owned properties, and various public facilities along the corridor. Renaming the streets would require property
owners and residents to update their mailing addresses, records, and business materials, which may result in
temporary administrative adjustments during the transition. The scheduled public hearing will allow residents and
stakeholders to provide input before the Council makes a final determination.

$0.00
STREET NAME CHANGES FOR NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET

APPROVAL
B ryant St
Road Name Change O akla

Proposal Map
Lee St to MLK Jr Way

M ann B l vd
N Le e St

M ill
Legend
C er es a Dr
Street Limits of
Lee St

N Lee St
M ann Blvd

dge
N H en ry Blv
d 23
23 N He nry Blv d

Stockbridge
Elementary

L a ne Dr
School

R o ck Quarry Rd
S Lee St
´ S p rin g S t

v a C ir
No

Jacks on Dr
Patrick Henry
High School ov
a Cir

S L ee St Microsoft, Vantor, Esri Community Maps Contributors, © OpenStreetMap,
S L TomTom,
Microsoft, Esri, e e S t Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/
0 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS
Miles Creator: Brennen Reilly
Date: 02/06/2026
Parcel ID Address
049-01007000 152 ROCK QUARRY RD
049-01007002 122 ROCK QUARRY RD
S25-01009000 0
S25-01010000 123 DUVALL DR
S25-01011000 121 DUVALL DR
S25-01012000 119 DUVALL DR
S25-01013000 117 DUVALL DR
S25-01013001 115 DUVALL DR
S25-01030000 106 BRYANT ST
S25-01031000 108 BRYANT ST
S25-01032000 110 BRYANT ST
S25-01033000 112 BRYANT ST
S25-01034000 114 BRYANT ST
S25-01035000 0 BRYANT ST
S25-01036000 122 BRYANT ST
S25-01037000 124 BRYANT ST
S25-01038000 126 BRYANT ST
S25-01039000 128 BRYANT ST
S25-01042000 127 BRYANT ST
S25-01043000 125 BRYANT ST
S25-01044000 123 BRYANT ST
S25-01045000 121 BRYANT ST
S25-01047000 0 BRYANT ST
S25-01048000 115 BRYANT ST
S25-01049000 113 BRYANT ST
S25-01050000 111 BRYANT ST
S25-01051000 109 BRYANT ST
S25-01052000 107 BRYANT ST
S25-01053000 105 BRYANT ST
S26-01014000 4482 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-01015000 4498 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-01016000 4518 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-01017001 4528 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-01018000 4534 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-01020000 109 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01021000 103 BRANNAN DR
S26-01021001 111 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01022000 113 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01023000 115 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01024000 117 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01025000 102 CERESEA DR
S26-01026000 104 CERESEA DR
S26-01027000 100 BRANNAN DR
S26-01030000 101 BRANNAN DR
S26-02001000 4566 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-02001001 0 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-02002000 110 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02003000 112 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02004000 114 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02006000 118 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02023000 113 EAST ATLANTA RD
S26-02027000 4640 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-02027000 4650 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-04007000 4617 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-04007000 109 S LEE ST
S26-04009000 108 S LEE ST
S26-04010000 106 S LEE ST
S26-04011000 0 S LEE ST
S26-04012000 102 S LEE ST
S26-04013000 4557 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-04014000 4545 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-04015000 0
S26-04015001 4543 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S26-04015002 4541 NORTH HENRY BLVD
S27-01001000 117 JACKSON DR
S27-01001000 119 JACKSON DR
S27-01001000 121 JACKSON DR
S27-01001000 123 JACKSON DR
S27-01002000 109 JACKSON DR
S27-01002000 115 JACKSON DR
S27-01002000 111 JACKSON DR
S27-01002000 113 JACKSON DR
S27-01003000 101 JACKSON DR
S27-01003000 107 JACKSON DR
S27-01003000 103 JACKSON DR
S27-01003000 105 JACKSON DR
S27-01004000 116 JACKSON DR
S27-01004000 122 JACKSON DR
S27-01004000 118 JACKSON DR
S27-01004000 120 JACKSON DR
S27-01005000 108 JACKSON DR
S27-01005000 114 JACKSON DR
S27-01005000 110 JACKSON DR
S27-01005000 112 JACKSON DR
S27-01006000 100 JACKSON DR
S27-01006000 102 JACKSON DR
S27-01006000 104 JACKSON DR
S27-01006000 106 JACKSON DR
S27-01008000 115 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01008000 102 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 114 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 106 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 108 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 110 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 104 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 100 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 112 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 214 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 208 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 206 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 202 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 200 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 204 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 212 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 210 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 306 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 314 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 308 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 302 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 310 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 304 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 300 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 312 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 408 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 410 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 412 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 406 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 414 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 400 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 402 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 404 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 504 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 502 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 514 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 506 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 512 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 508 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 510 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 500 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 602 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 610 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 604 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 606 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 600 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 608 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 614 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 612 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 707 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 705 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 701 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 713 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 709 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 703 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 711 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 715 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 803 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 807 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 801 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 811 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 815 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 813 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 805 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 809 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 909 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 911 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 903 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 901 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 907 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 915 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 905 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 913 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1004 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1006 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1002 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1008 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1010 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1012 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1000 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1014 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1114 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1110 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1112 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1100 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1104 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1108 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1106 NOVA CIR
S27-01008000 1102 NOVA CIR
S27-01009000 121 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01010000 119 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01011000 111 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01012000 123 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01013000 0 S LEE ST
S27-01014000 500 S LEE ST
S27-01015000 125 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01015001 127 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01016000 0 ROCK QUARRY RD
S27-01017000 0 ROCK QUARRY RD
S33-01011002 110 ROCK QUARRY RD
S33-01012000 114 ROCK QUARRY RD
S33-01013000 116 ROCK QUARRY RD
S33-01013001 118 ROCK QUARRY RD
S33-01014000 121 LAMBERT DR
Owner Names
VULCAN LANDS INC
HENRY COUNTY
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
PEREZ FERNANDO & CABRERA MIGDALIA J
CUSTIN ROGER B & HORTON GREGORY W
DOBBS MARK R
SANDERS ZACHARY
BURNETT WILLIE M
CHAMBERS CHARLES G
CAPERS CORDELL
WESSELINK COREY
CHAVEZ EDITH
SEALS WAYNE
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
GREGORY JOHN M
DODGEN BONNIE R & TAYLOR LISA L
HOWZE ERNEST L JR
FKH SFR PROPCO H LP
PERPALL BRUQUESHA T
MCCONLEY LINDA J
HAFLEY CHRISTY W & MICHAEL R
OSORES-GONZAGA VICENTE
GRIFFIN SHAWN P SR
N/A
FOSTER JEFFREY N
RANDAZZO SUNNY & TYLER
SHAWN HORACE LIVING TRUST
LERMA RAQUEL & LILIANA
DEAMUES JANE
THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
JHJ BRIDGE VILLAGE LLC
BRIDGE VILLAGE II LLC
BRIDGE VILLAGE II LLC
CARRABELLE REAL ESTATE LLC
HOLLOWAY IV CHARLES W & ANNA
DUNBAR COREY
DRILLOT KRISTIE BECK
GROCE MARVIN F
SANDERS JUNE T M
CALLAWAY BRENDA
HOLT WILLIAM Z
DONNA EDGINGTON REALTY LLC
ALAIMO PETER D & ANN FRANCIS
FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF STOCKBRIDGE INC
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
STOCKBRIDGE ELEM SCHOOL HENRY COUNTY BD OF EDUCATION
STOCKBRIDGE ELEM SCHOOL HENRY COUNTY BD OF EDUCATION
DUBBS CHARLES L JR & LYNDA A
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
STOCKBRIDGE PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY
QUARRY FORTY-TWO LP
AUTOZONE INC
SRI REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
WILCOXSON LARRY D
WILCOXSON LARRY D
WILCOXSON LARRY D
WILCOXSON LARRY D
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
JACKSON LANDING LLC
ELDEN LLC
ELDEN LLC
ELDEN LLC
ELDEN LLC
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
TMF STOCKBRIDGE LLC & LATTA STOCKBRIDGE
LENIX PRASARTPORN & WILLIAM R
119 ROCK QUARRY LP
HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA
HUDDLESTON CONCRETE CO
READY MIX USA LLC
READY MIX USA LLC
AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST MINISTRIES INC
STRICKLAND JERRY C
HUDDLESTON CONCRETE CO
RAVEN JAMES S JR
ESP2 PROPERTIES LLC
EVANS LAWRENCE C JR & LAWRENCE C III
NAYTAK CORPORATION
MAH QUARRY HOLDINGS LLC & ET AL
FOWLER DORTHY H
PARCELS WITH ADDRESSES OF N LEE ST OR S LEE ST
Parcel ID Address
S26-01020000 109 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01021001 111 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01022000 113 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01023000 115 NORTH LEE ST
S26-01024000 117 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02002000 110 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02003000 112 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02004000 114 NORTH LEE ST
S26-02006000 118 NORTH LEE ST
S26-04007000 109 S LEE ST
S26-04009000 108 S LEE ST
S26-04010000 106 S LEE ST
S26-04011000 0 S LEE ST
S26-04012000 102 S LEE ST
S27-01013000 0 S LEE ST
S27-01014000 500 S LEE ST
CELS WITH ADDRESSES OF N LEE ST OR 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
NAMING OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. WAY:
STREET RENAMING
OF NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET

Presented at the City Council Retreat
On March 2-4, 2026
By the Community Development Department
PURPOSE AND REASONS
PURPOSE—The City of Stockbridge proposes to name a street within the Stockbridge
City Limits to honor and commemorate the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and his
contributions to the heritage of the City.

REASONS:
1. To recognize the contributions of Martin Luther King, Jr. to the City of Stockbridge,
in addition to already recognizing and commemorating the contributions of Martin
Luther King, Sr.
2. To provide a more appropriate and more recently-relevant name to North Lee Street
and South Lee Street, which were named after a Confederate General, Robert E. Lee.
3. To provide a more familiar and unifying name to a street which has high visibility due
to its location near City Hall and the Amphitheater.
AERIAL PHOTO OF THE LEE STREET VICINITY
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Martin Luther King, Sr. was born and raised in Stockbridge, and he preached at the
historic Floyd Chapel Baptist Church at 104 First Street, where a street plaque was
erected in his honor. The City of Stockbridge also honored him by renaming several
streets in Downtown Stockbridge, along the railroad tracks (North Berry Street, South
Berry Street, and Railroad Street) to “Martin Luther King, Sr. Heritage Trail” on
September 14, 2025. The City also placed a commemorative plaque on the exterior
wall of City Hall.

The Downtown Development Authority has proposed locating a statue of Martin
Luther King, Sr. in a City-owned park at 102 South Lee Street, adjacent to the
Stockbridge police headquarters.

The City desires to further honor and commemorate the King family by naming a City
street after Martin Luther King, Jr.
ABOUT NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET
1. Location--North Lee Street and South Lee Street cross North Henry Boulevard in the
center of the City, near the Stockbridge First Baptist Church and the Stockbridge
Police Headquarters.
2. Extents--North Lee Street is a two-lane road which extends from North Henry
Boulevard northward to Ceresea Drive. South Lee Street is a two-lane road which
extends from north Henry Boulevard southward and eastward to Rock Quarry Road.
4. No Changes--With the proposed street renaming, no changes would be made to the
configurations of North Lee Street or South Lee Street, or to the zoning of the
adjacent properties.
5. Main Street Program--North Lee Street and South Lee Street are located within the
boundaries of the City’s Main Street Program.
6. Component Parcels--Sixteen (16) parcels have frontage on North Lee Street and
South Lee Street, as are shown on the next two slides, which feature a map and a
spreadsheet.
PARCEL MAP FOR
NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET
PARCEL SPREADSHEET FOR
NORTH LEE STREET AND SOUTH LEE STREET
STAFF ANALYSIS
STAFF ANALYSIS—The proposed renaming of North Lee Street and South Lee Street
to Martin Luther King, Jr. Way would be beneficial to the City of Stockbridge for the
following reasons:

1. It would provide a more appropriate name for the streets, in recognition of the more
recent legacy and contributions of the Martin Luther King family to the heritage of
the City of Stockbridge.

2. It would provide a similar recognition to Martin Luther King, Jr. as the existing street,
Martin Luther King, Sr. Heritage Trail, does to Martin Luther King, Sr.

3. It would provide a familiar name to highly visible street within the core of Downtown
Stockbridge, City Hall, and the Amphitheater.

4. It would provide a name recognition for a street that is located within the boundaries
of the City’s Main Street Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Adopt a resolution to rename both North Lee Street and South Lee Street to
“Martin Luther King, Jr. Way.”

2. Notify the owners of the sixteen (16) owners of properties along North Lee Street
and South Lee Street so that they can change their home and business addresses.
STATE OF GEORGIA
HENRY COUNTY
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE

RESOLUTION NO. __________________________

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge is a duly-authorized municipal corporation as
defined by the laws of the State of Georgia; and

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge wishes to recognize and commemorate its historical
heritage; and

WHEREAS, Martin Luther King, Jr. had a significant role in the heritage of the City of
Stockbridge;

WHEREAS, Martin Luther King, Sr., the father of Martin Luther King, Jr., who once
preached at the historic Floyd Chapel Baptist Church at 104 First Street in Stockbridge,
was previously honored with a commemorative plaque at the church, as well as within
City Hall;

WHEREAS, the Stockbridge City Council adopted a resolution on September 14, 2015
to name a street, Martin Luther King, Sr. Heritage Trail, after Martin Luther King, Sr.;

WHEREAS, the City of Stockbridge wishes to further honor the Martin Luther King
family, whose ancestral home was Stockbridge, by renaming a street after Martin Luther
King, Jr.;

WHEREAS, the City Council has identified North Lee Street and South Lee Street,
which cross North Henry Boulevard in the center of the City, as being the appropriate
streets for renaming to honor Martin Luther King, Jr.;

WHEREAS, the Downtown Development Authority has also proposed locating a statue
of Martin Luther King, Sr. in a City of Stockbridge-owned park at 102 South Lee Street,
adjacent to the Stockbridge police headquarters;

WHEREAS, the City Council desires to rename both North Lee Street and South Lee
Street to “Martin Luther King, Jr. Way”;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Approval. The City of Stockbridge does hereby approve the renaming of
both North Lee Street and South Lee Street to “Martin Luther King, Jr. Way.”

SECTION 2. Public Record. This document shall be maintained as a public record by
the City Clerk and it shall be accessible to the public during all normal business hours of
the City of Stockbridge.

SECTION 3. Authorization of Execution. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign all
documents that are necessary to effectuate this Resolution.

SECTION 4. Attestation. The City Clerk is authorized to execute, attest to, and seal
any documents which may be necessary to effectuate this ordinance, subject to
approval as to form by the City Attorney.

SECTION 5. City Attorney Authority. Pursuant to the City’s charter and with explicit
consent of the City Counsel, the City Attorney is duly authorized to make requisite
amendments to all contracts, ordinances, resolutions, and documents, as may be
necessary, in order to secure conformity with the express intent of the City Council and
to ensure adherence to all pertinent laws and ordinances of the City.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon
its adoption by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Stockbridge as provided in the
City Charter.

SO ORDAINED this ________ day of ________________, 2026.

JAYDEN L. WILLIAMS, MAYOR
ATTEST:

__________________________________ (SEAL)

CASSANDRA LESTER, INTERIM CITY CLERK

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

QUINTON G. WASHINGTON, City Attorney
Page ll

APPROVED MINUTES
COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2015 6:00 PM

Mayor & City Council Administration
'l'im L. Thompson, Mayor Michael Harris, City Manager

Alphonso Thomas, Councilman Vanessa Holiday, City Clerk
Robin Buschman, Councilwoman Randi Rainey, Deputy City Clerk

Anthonys. Ford, Councilman Michael Williams, City Attorney
LaKeisha Gantt, Councilwoman

Regina Lewis \Nard, Councilwoman

The Council meeting was called to order by Mayor Tim L. Thompson at 6:00PM. City Clerk,
Vanessa Holiday was asked to proceed with a verbal roll call. All members of Council were present
and a quorum was confirmed. Councilman stated for the record Councilwoman Gantt will be
absent.

invocation was provided by Mayor Thompson.

Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all in attendance.

Mayor Thompson recognized former Councilmember Kathy Gilbert and former Mayor Lee Stuart in
attendance.

Councilwoman Gantt motioned to amend the Agenda to include item #9 Council Discussion of the
Charter update and Item #10 LMlG Paving project update; second by Councilman Ford. The motion
passed 5-0.

Mayor Thompson inquired as to when the Council received the Charter update book and was
informed by Councilwoman Gantt that books were received this week and Council wanted to open
up the discussion.

Mayor Thompson stated the reason he removed the Charter update from the Agenda was because
historically, council meetings have been voting meetings and discussions are held at Work Session
meetings, and his personally opinion is that the Charter update should be moved to the Work
Session, however, that's Council's prerogative.

Councilwoman Gantt stated that Council has actually had discussion items on the Agenda in the
past outside of Work Session meetings and considers the Charter amendment to be a very
important item. Councilwoman Gantt further stated that she has brought the Charter amendment
item up for discussion at the June 9, 2014 council meeting and distributed to the Council a copy of
the GMA Model Charter; and noted that the City's Charter has not been amended since 1991 and
stated the discussion needs to start.

September 14, 2015 6:00pm 4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
Mayor Thompson stated he did receive the Charter document on Friday morning and noted that he
had a call in to the City Attorney and has yet to return his phone call. Mayor Thompson expressed
he finds it astonishing the Mayor would have a completely new Charter, the eve of the meeting and
expects a discussion. Mayor Thompson informed the audience that the proposed Charter book is
shift in their form of Government; the document as written will take powers away from the
180
taxpayers. Mayor Thompson stated he has not received one phone call suggesting to create a
brand new Charter. Mr. Thompson agrees the Charter should be tweaked, but not a brand new
Charter. Mayor Thompson expressed he has received calls about street paving, sanitation, sewer,
parking in the street, etc.; but has yet to receive a call from any citizens in reference to revising the
Charter.

Mayor Thompson further stated that as the CEO of the City, he finds it interesting that he has yet to
have any discussions with the City Attorney or anyone in Management with the City on the proposed
Charter. Mayor Thompson stated he thinks this would be better dealt with in a public forum such as
a town hall meeting, if that's the desire of this Council and prefers that format for the Body, especially

if its going to take power away from the citizens.

Councilwoman Gantt stated the proposed Charter will not take away any powers from the citizens
at all, and if fact this is just for discussion. Councilwoman Gantt expressed there were more people
in attendance tonight that has attended a meeting all year, and what better time to discuss the

Charter. Councilwoman Gantt stated that the Charter has been talked about for two years, and

during the debate when she ran for office, was stated that the current Charter is one of the main
it
reason the City continues to end up in litigation.

Councilwoman Gantt further stated that she would ask Council if they would agree to a town hall
meeting;and mentioned the proposed form of government that Mayor Thompson is discussing is a
City Manager/Council form of government to include the Mayor and the City has been acting in this
capacity for years and we would like the Charter to reflect the current operations of the City.

Councilwoman Gantt noted that with changes to the Charter, there will be some improvements and
likewise there may be some disagreements, but the discussion needs to start.

Councilwoman Gantt noted that she understands the Mayor has removed the Charter Update
discussion item from the Agenda; however, she has reviewed the Charter and the City’s ordinances
and cannot ﬁnd where anyone has the authority to remove items from the Agenda, and that’s exactly
what the Mayor did.

Councilwoman Gantt further noted that the Charter states it is the City Council's meeting and
anyone on Council should be able to place items on the Agenda. Councilwoman Gantt also
mentioned she just does not know if anyone can remove items from the Agenda, and recommends
that Council put a protocol together as soon as possible.

Councilwoman Gantt continued by stating the intent of placing the Charter Amendment item was
only up for discussion tonight, as it is outdated.

Mayor Thompson stated for the public that he is in full cooperation with having the discussion;
however, it has been the practice over the years that the Mayor sets the Agenda, and asked the
City Attorney to offer his opinion.

if
City Attorney, Mike Williams stated that offered an opinion on this matter earlier today; however,
Council is alright with him revealing the opinion publically, he would be happy to oblige.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (77 0) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Mayor Thompson asked Council if they are in consensus with Mr. Williams releasing the opinion,
and all the members of Council agreed.

Mr. Williams stated “the opinion that he gave this afternoon stated that under the current Charter,
the Mayor has the duty and responsibility to prepare the Agenda and that once the Agenda is
prepared, it is the Councils privilege to amend the Agenda as it sees fit".

Councilman Thomas stated the City Attorney made a point when he stated the Council has the
authority to set policies and procedures on how meetings are conducted. Councilman Thomas also
noted there have been instances where items have become before Council at the voting session
meetings where there was no vote, Mr. Thomas stated it is clearly documented the conflict within
the Charter on who has the power, the Mayor or City Manager.

Councilwoman Buschman inquired on how long the discussion should last. Mr. Williams replied he
just thinks it should be about a 5 minute introduction, and seeking what Council would like to do
next.

City Manager, Mr. Harris asked in reference to the LMlG item, if there could be a discussion followed
by a vote from Council at tonight’s meeting.

Councilwoman Gantt rescinded her original motion.

Councilwoman Gantt motioned to amend the Agenda to include a discussion on an updated Charter
project; and to include a voting discussion on the LMlG paving project. Councilman Ford provided
the second; the motion passed 5-0.

Councilman Ford motioned to approve the Minutes of July 13, 2015; Councilwoman Buschman
provided the second; the motion passed 5—O.

Mayor Thompson presented a Proclamation to Mary Hancock of the Daughters of the American
Revolution for Constitution Week.

Mayor Thompson attempted to present a proclamation to Dwight Helton of Action Ministries for
Smart Lunch/Smart Kids Program, who unfortunately was not in attendance.

Mayor Thompson presented to Kim Moye, City of Stockbridge Payroll Clerk, and a proclamation for
National Payroll Week.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Leonard Yancey spoke regarding the Noise Nuisance being abused.

Elton Alexander spoke regarding litigation costs and lawsuits.

Lee Stuart spoke about the budget, City’s Charter and signage.

Chip Flannigan spoke about the Budget and City elections.
'Response- Councilwoman Buschman ~
challenges anyone to find the video of her being
accused of stating she is in charge now.

Kathryn Gilbert spoke about the Charter and meetings.

September 14, 2015 6:00pm 4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
Response- Councilman Thomas —

spoke in reference on the difference between a raise and
compensation.

Response- Mayor Thompson— apologized to the citizens for hearing about all of the negativity;
and asked everyone to look in the mirror and examine what they want in their community. Mayor
Thompson urges all to demand to see the investigative report.

Response- Councilman Ford— stated all decisions made by Council are video tapped, audio
recorded, and has minutes typed. All decision are on record and encourages all to look for
themselves and the truth will set them free.

Councilman Thomas referenced the Resolution before the Council to amend and approve funding
of the MLK, Sr. plaque.

Councilman Thomas motioned to amend the original Resolution to include the use of the remaining
funds of $479 to hold a banquet or celebration in recognition of the initiative; second by Councilman
Ford. The motion passed 5-0.

PUBLIC HEARING:

Councilman Thomas stated back in January there was a Resolution offered to identify the City as
the ancestral home of the King family and to commission a committee that would research and
identify a street that would be named for the King family.

Councilman Thomas expressed he has had several meetings with the committee and they identified
BerryStreet as the chosen street. Councilman Thomas stated he felt that this street gives
significates to the City in what the King legacy really means. Mr. Thomas also stated there was a
meet and greet at the Merle Manders Conference Center to share with the citizens why that street
was chosen and the significates of revitalizing the downtown area.

Councilman Thomas stated all across the country, the King family is recognized; and, the City of
Stockbridge only recognizes the King family at Red Oak Elementary school.

Councilman Thomas expressed he received a letter from the King family stating how excited they
were and are looking fonivard with coming to the city. Mr. Thomas also stated
he has spoken with

some of the business owners located on Berry Street, whom at first was forthe name change. Since
then, some of the business owners have changed their minds and created a petition to not have the
street name changed. Councilman Thomas expressed he hopes everyone can see the benefits of
naming the street and are trying to assist all the business that will be effected by the changes.

Councilman Thomas explained the streets that are included with the name change are N. Berry St,
8. Berry St. and Railroad St.

SPEAKERS IN FAVOR: Marilyn Flynn, Mildred R-eed, Melvin Fulton, Bishop Irvine Bryer, Sarah
Billups, Rev. E.C. Cochran, Greg Horton, Lee Stuart, Kathryn Vallish, Elton Alexander, Renee Shaw
and Neat Robinson.

SPEAKERS OPPOSED: Roger Custin.

Councilman Thomas motioned to approve the Resolution of the MLK Sr. Heritage Trail (Street
Renaming); second by Councilman Ford. The motion passed 5-0.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Page|5

Councilman Thomas thanked everyone for their support and pledged to maintain the street with
pride. Mr. Thomas also thanked and recognized the members of the MLK Sr. Historical Preservation
Committee in attendance.

PUBLIC HEARING:

Dale Hall, Administration and Community Services Director presented the following Variance
Request: VR-15—10—S Location: Langley Oaks Residential Subdivision, Lots 23, 24, 25, 26 Land Lot
5 of the 12”‘ District Parcel ID: 0318-01—O23—00O, 0318-01-024-O00, 0318-01-025-O00, 0318-01-
026—OOO. Variance to reduce the minimum front and rear setbacks.

Mr. Hall, Administration and Community Services Director stated the applicant is requesting a

variance from the front and rear yard setbacks on Lots 23-26 to allow the construction of single
Mr. Hall stated the issues that
family residential on Dustin Court in the Langley Oaks subdivision.
were discussion at the last Work Session where with lots 23 and 24, in which part
of the land had

backed up into the Avian Forrest subdivision. Mr. Hall stated with reducing the rear yard setback, it
would bring the building closer to the property line, and there is also an existing tree buffer.

Mr. Hall stated the applicant recently submitted a revision to the request to express their concerns
in regardsto lot 23 and 24. Lots 23 shows there is a setback of 27.5 ft.; instead of asking for an
increase in the rear lot; it would be moving the building fonrvard and increasing the setback in the
front lot area. in regards to Lot 24, the building has been adjusted from the previous request, sliding
forward to minimize the front setback and increasing the rear yard setback. Lot 25 is doing the same
as Lot 24 and Lot 26 is the original request that was made on the application.

Mr. Hall stated if the building is moved forward and the front yard setbacks are decreased, the one
main concern to consider is the "actual size of a standard car. Mr. Hall explained if the front yard
setback is minimized and the drive way length decreased, this would have the cars parked into the
street. The applicant is asking for a reduction in the front and rear yard setbacks.

Councilwoman Gantt asked Mr. Hall what does staff replied the
recommends. Mr. Hall
recommendation from the Henry County Planning and Zoning Department was to deny. Mr. Hall
mentioned at the last meeting, there was some discussion on what the recommendation was, and
expressed concerns with the rear yard setback.

Councilwoman Gantt stated she understands Lot 23 may be a concern if the variance is approved;
and inquired if the issues have been addressed with the other lots and approved by staff. Mr. Hall
responded the issues would be the minimizing rear yard setbacks, however, the impacted area is
an open space/ natural conservation area.

Councilwoman Lewis Ward stated at the last meeting there were seven (7) criteria’s that was not
met at that time, and inquired ifany of the criteria’s have been met. Mr. Hall replied they are the
same request in which some have been met. According to the Georgia Planning Act, the planning
staff recommendation has to be met on all criteria’s. Councilwoman Lewis Ward stated and inquired
if Council decides to accept the staff recommendation and not approve, does the builder have
alternative building plans? Mr. Hall responded the alternative building plan presented tonight, are
slight variations of the building that was presented.

Councilman Ford stated his concern is making sure there is enough driveway space in the
Cul-de-sac.

Councilwoman Gantt stated she is uncomfortable at this moment voting for a variance if Council
does not have all of the information.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Page |6

Councilman Thomas made a motion to table this item until the next City Council Meeting;
Councilwoman Gantt provided the second; the motion passed 5/0.

Kevin Walter, Public Works Director presented the new job description for Water System Chief
Operator. Councilwoman Bushman made a motion to approve the Resolution; second by
Councilman Ford. The motion passed 5-0.

Renee Wheeler, HR Manager presented Pay Classification Scale to include the Water System Chief
Councilman Ford made a motion to approve the Resolution; second by Councilwoman
Operator;
Gantt. The motion passed 5-0.

Renee Wheeler, HR Manager presented the Organizational Chart to include the Water System
Chief Operator; Councilwoman Buschman made a motion to approve the Resolution; second by
Councilwoman Gantt. The motion passed 5-0.

An Ordinance for Budget Amendment 2015-O04 in the amount of $269,885 was presented by
Treasurer, Linda Nabers. Ms. Nabers inquired if it was Councils wishes to separate into roman
numerals voting individually or vote together. Councilwoman Buschman stated due to litigation, she
requested by email to separateby line item and vote on each item individually for transparency, if it
is Council consensus. Councilman Ford concurred.

Ms. Nabers stated the following:

I. Litigation is $ 59,999

Councilwoman Gantt inquired if the budget amendment was for items that had already been paid,
and if so, is this to amend the budget. Ms. Nabers confirmed and stated roman numerals l, lll, IV
and V have been paid out. III, IV and V were a part of the 2014 budget, however; theinvoices were
paid in 2015.

Councilwoman Buschman stated due to her prior vote against the litigation, which has already been
paid for, she would like for her vote to stay consistent. Councilwoman Buschman asked City
Attorney, Mike Williams if Council should vote on the items individually or make a motion for III, IV,
and V. Mr. Williams responded the cleanest way would be to adopt the budget amendment as
presented, then have each member explain their position and enter them in the Minutes for the
record. Mr. Williams also mentioned there is a concern for Councilwoman Buschman and the DDA
litigation and wants her to state for the record her position. Councilwoman Buschman wanted to
clarify with Mr. Williams when it's time to vote, she should make here statement during the
discussion. Mr. Williams responded yes and if Councilwoman Bushman has more to add, she can
write a written statement to have added into the approved minutes.

Councilman Thomas stated his concern with not voting by line item. Mr. Williams stated the line
items are clear and majority of the funds will come from the fund balance. Councilman Thomas I

stated he is favor of voting line item by line item and referenced a prior meeting where this issue
was addressed.

Mr. Williams noted the prior item and stated that is was a personnel item and this was not the same
type of concern.

Councilman Thomas stated that as long as the account numbers are referenced he would be in
favor.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Councilwoman Buschman noted that the line items were lumped and she would unable to vote on
the item with it be noted this way.

Ms. Nabers noted that both she and the City Manager have been granted authority to transfer funds
within departments.

Mayor Thompson made a statement about fuzzy math in government and reckless spending by the
Council, in particular, legal fees outside of the budget in which some items have already been spent
and paid. Mayor Thompson stated there was not enough money in the budget to pay those bills.

Mayor Thompson went on to say that this is his concern with the changing of the Charter and you
leave these types of decisions up to the Council, there would be no checks and balances.

Mayor Thompson stated the Council approved legal and litigation fees and litigation that had not
previously been budgeted, in particular, Mayor Thompson addressed the legal fees paid to former
Mayor Lee Stuart in the amount of $59,999 that the Council agreed to pay as their prerogative
without reference to where the funds would come from. Mayor Thompson stated that citizens would
to spend money,
pay for it and the City was upside down on the budget and if the City was going
about these things.
you need to call for a budget amendment and think

Mayor Thompson then referenced item #2 in the amount of$125,001 for legal spending and brought
forward City Attorney’s contract in the amount of $150,000 and spoke to the stipulation to Mr.
Williams’ contract and stipulations and noted that he was the highest paid in the City’s history ever.
Mayor Thompson then noted the salary of the Governor, Attorney General and then the salary of a
Supreme Court Justice. Mayor Thompson noted that his objections to hire the City Attorney.

Mayor Thompson then referenced the Charter amendment being brought forward and that the City

Attorney had not returned his call.

Councilman Thomas stated that the Mayor was out of order as the item being presented was the
budget amendment and not the City Attorney’s contract.

Deputy Clerk, Randi Rainey stepped away momentarily and the meeting was suspended until she
returned.

Mayor Thompson noted that he had done an analysis of spending compared to the previous year
and felt it would be beneficial to note where monies would come from before spending.

Councilman Thomas stated that for transparency purposes, don't overlook the fact that the litigation,
the SDS for police services, the DDA litigation and the Buschman and Steinberg investigation, the
charges for all were led by Mayor Thompson.

Councilwoman Gantt noted that the legal fees on Section 1 and 2 of the budget amendment have
nothing to do with Mr. Williams’ contract as that item has been budgeted and approved and that
monies are budgeted each year, no different from any other year for the amount spent for legal
counsel. Councilwoman Gantt has legal counsel if while the discussion of the settlement of the Lee
Stuart case was held in Executive Session, could it be discussed in public as to who was in
agreement with the settlement, and does not mind do so as the public needs to know what took
place.

Councilman Ford stated that he didn’t think that was necessary as the Council voted to settle back
inMay and has been to that individual, its a done deal and this is an administrative action that
paid
needs to occur. The discussion was made publically and is available in the Minutes and on tape.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Councilwoman Gantt stated that while she understood that, her concern is not necessarily what was
voted for, but rather making it known to the public who led the way and agreed to it. Ms. Gantt went
on to say that yes, the Council votes, but did the Mayor agree as well.

Councilwoman Gantt further stated that the tables have turned tonight and does not understand
where this is from; the litigation issues were all led by the Mayor and believes that this is
coming
being brought up by the Mayor because she brought fonivard the discussion of the City’s Charter.

Councilwoman Gantt went on to say that there will be other opportunities to address the Charter
and that Mr. Williams has been working on the draft of the Charter for months, has mentioned it
over and over again, and it is including in the City Manager’s report. And if the Mayor didn't know,
then he has not been paying attention to what’s been going on in the City because the report
consistently said that the City Attorney has been working on, editing, revising and revamping the
Charter. Ms. Gantt further stated that she believes this is all has to do with the Mayor not liking a
change to the Charter. And the Charter needs to be changed.

Mayor Thompson stated that Councilwoman Gantt was making a presumption about the Mayor.

Councilwoman Gantt stated that the Mayor has been talking about the Charter and the item
and
presented was to amend the budget and instead that the Mayor jumped on the City Attorney
none of this was about him; not one line item is about the City Attorney. But rather,
it was about

litigation, the DDA SDS and former Mayor Stuart’s case that the City agreed to settle, and the Mayor
was the head of and is now trying to figure out why the Mayor is bringing this
about now and trying

to make them look crazy when he in fact was a part of it.

Councilwoman Gantt asked for the politics to stop tonight. And that's why she asked for a revision
of the Charter. Councilwoman Gantt stated that as a Council Member she also represents the Body
and Stockbridge and her intent in bringing the Charter forward tonight was only to get the discussion
going, and bring it back to a town hall meeting.

Councilwoman Gantt further noted that the change does not take away citizen’s rights as the Mayor
has stated and asked the Council to allow the memorandum that was prepared by the City Attorney
be made public to the media to allow the public to see that while the City’s history previously acted
with a full-time Mayor, that changed, and a City Manager was hired, and that’s the way the City is
currently operating.Councilwoman Gantt asked that the games stop, things to be clear and concise
and remove the gray areas, and that she wants to see buildings going up, jobs come to Stockbridge
and the embracingof the but instead, games are being played and the Mayor is the
City’s diversity;
head of it.

Councilman Thomas agreed with Councilwoman Gantt and further stated that he and everyone on
the Council and including the Mayor, wanted to reemphasize that the Mayor led the charge against
the DDA, that led the charge with the SDS Agreement, and that he led the charge with the
Buschman and Steinberg litigation, and asked the Mayor not to sit there and pretend that it was the
Council spending this money. Councilman Thomas stated that he was upset about this and that the
dais.
Mayor and Council knows about all of this. Councilman Thomas then excused himself from the

Mayor Thompson stated that there have been a lot of things said about him spearheading items
and acknowledged that he spearheaded the DDA issue as there are some serious issues involving
the Downtown Development Authority, and the money and properties that were transferred off of
the City’s books, and that this was not part of this discussion tonight.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge,’ GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
for police
Mayor Thompson stated that in terms of him spearheading the SDS Agreement, that was
services and joint venture with the County on, and that's a required agreement with the County.

Mayor Thompson stated that since brought up since salaries, and noted that
this was
Councilwoman Gantt was correct, this was not about the City Attorney’s contract, but he has made
it about his contract because the City is asking taxpayers for more money in the amount of
$269,885.

Mayor Thompson stated that he doesn't have a vote, and while there has been talk of him
spearheading things, check the record as he has never voted for anything.

vote
Mayor Thompson apologized and corrected his statement and noted that he broke the tie to
for selection of Mayor Pro Tem Thomas, and another time during the investigation of Councilwoman
Buschman and those of the two times that he has voted.

of Atlanta
Mayor Thompson then referenced a meeting regarding the SDS Agreement in the City
where the City Manager asked the City Attorney to attend, and failed to appear.

Mayor Thompson stated that he has a base salary of $10,400 annually, and doesn’t havea big
base salary and thought the City Attorney should have been in attendance.

Councilman Thomas returned to the dais.

Councilman Ford made motion to approve Budget Amendment 2015-004 in the amount of

$269,885 in its entirety to balance the books; second by Councilwoman Gantt. Councilwoman
Buschman made a statement that she is a strong advocate against litigation and noted that she
settlement
supports the other items included in the budget amendment and excluding the Lee Stuart
and also the DDA litigation due to her recusal and would therefore not be voting on this item. Motion
approved 4-0-1 (Councilwoman Buschman recused herself from the vote).

City Attorney, Michael Williams presented the Ethics Ordinance item to the Council and
characterized the item as a housekeeping item as it removes the provisions in the existing ordinance
as it relates to the Ethics Committee. Most of the provisions laying
out alleged violations, or potential

violations, in some ways conflict with the provisions or similar provisions in the Charter, and for
those reasons there is concern that they are either duplicative or in outright conflict.

Mr. Williams further noted that the harshest punishment under that ordinance is either a public
or a request for resignation, whereas the Charter allows for potential removal
if violations
reprimand
are proven.

Mr. Williams stated that his recommendation is to propose that if the Charter is revised, under the
GMA Model code, there is a provision for the City to appoint an impartial panel to hearthese alleged
violations (an ethics commission) to deal with the provisions laid out in the Charter as well as
been
provisions that the revised Charter would be able to identify. Additionally, the committee has
dormant for a couple of years. Therefore, the suggestion is to lay it aside and come back at a later

date to re-establish pursuant to the revised Charter and noted this is his recommendation to Council.

and
Mayor Thompson inquired as to whether or not this is in relationship to his investigation
presumed that this why this item was placed on the Agenda.

Mr. Williams stated to Mayor Thompson that he was free to speak, and did not know
what he was
intending to say, and could therefore not advise.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
on his part as
Mayor Thompson stating that and to protect his integrity, it would be a presumption
to why he was going to be presumptuous about his comments as to why this item was placed on
the Agenda.

and that his
The Mayor stated that the City has spent over $56,000 investigating its peers,
amount of and that taxpayers should be entitled to see
investigation has cost an astounding money
and that attorney is still the clock.
the investigation, except the investigation is not finished yet, on

disband the ethics board, the
Mayor Thompson noted that this Council can investigate and can
citizens’ board for ethics that has been in effect for a long time; and considers it disingenuous. Mayor
action taken by the new
Thompson noted that disbanding the ethics board was one of the first
Council in January 2014. Mayor Thompson stated that the City Attorney noted that it conflicts with

the Charter.

d read: the
Mayor Thompson went on to read the Charter Section 2.40.020 talks about the scope
provisions of this

but to be clear, the
Mayor Thompson stated that he is not saying whether he is for or against it,
facts as presented, is the fact that it conflicts, there is the statement right there, it conflicts. Mayor

Thompson then -asked Attorney Williams for the other reason.

the primary sanction was to
Attorney Williams’ response was that the Board was lying dormant and
reprimand and/or request removal or resignation.

that or the Board; and in
Mayor Thompson stated that was fair to allow the citizens could ask for
dormant was because of the
terms of the Board lying dormant, the reason the Board was lying

people that you are looking at, that’s the reason it’s lying dormant.

discussed
Councilwoman Gantt stated that Mayor Thompson agreed with disbanding the Board and
several occasions when they were all getting along, and that
the matter with the City Council on
although the Mayordoesn’t have a vote; and the Council advised to act by the previous attorneys
and legal counsel as well.

to
Councilwoman Gantt noted that she was aware of what the Ethics Board means, and happened
be the first Chair of the first Ethics Board, it is her opinion that the board was used as a tool,
City’s
the
especially during the campaign times to hold hearings and bring up frivolous cases against
Mayor and Council and could foresee it happening that way again.

lead
Councilwoman Gantt further stated that while the Mayor doesn’t have a vote, as the Mayor, he
the pack,and is now speaking out against it and that she understands and knows where this
information received
underlying anger is coming from; however, the thought is that based on new
about the proposed amended Charter, the Council may want to consider a motion to table to Ethics

Ordinance or vote for it; it's known to be used as a tool.

Councilwoman Gantt went on to say that it was uncomfortable for her as a member of Council
to

and said there were several things that need to be taken into consideration and
judge colleagues
doesn’t believe there is an underlying tone in dealing with you, the Mayor, but basically the issues
for more
have been discussed tonight and they have come up, and items that have been discussed
the issues forward and
than a year; it's time to get things moving. And when the Council brings
Council
speaks up for themselves and asks that the political games stop, then they as
a are

attacked.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Gantt that she was a
Mayor Thompson stated that he was not angry and stated to Councilwoman
member of the duly elected board and has a vote and referred to her as the Honorable

Councilwoman LaKeisha Gantt and can vote however she wants to vote, but prefers that she not
state to the public that he is the leader of the pack.

of the pack was
Mayor Thompson went on to say that it was seen earlier tonight who the leader
with all of the Agenda items who is the leader of the this city.

Mayor Thompson stated that when it comes to voting, he does not have a vote.

Councilman Thomas stated that he resents the fact that Mayor Thompson

ironic.
Mayor Thompson stated that he didn’t say whether he agreed or not, but that the timing
was

second
Councilwoman Gantt made a motion to table this item to be heard at the next Work Session;
by Councilman Ford. Motion approved 5-0.

OR13-295 relating to
City Manager, Michael Harris presented the item to amend Ordinance
Mr. Harris
Ancillary Wine Tasting Licenses and Ancillary Growler Malt Beverage Tasting Licenses.
noted that the owners had previously come before council to

Mr. Harris stated he had spoken with a few business owners in regards to the current Growler
services. Mr. Harris
provisions; and how some business owners would like to expand their
is
expressed the challenge is making sure staff thorough with research and evaluating; and would .

like to adopt an Ordinance similar to the City of Macon. The current Ordinance only allows for tasting
of wine and malt beverage; no more than 2 oz. can be consumed in a 24hr period. Some business
owners would like to expand to two 12 oz. pints per day.

Councilwoman Buschman asked how long has the Ordinance been looked at. Mr. Harris answered
a few months back. Some of the business owners have had conversations with the Mayor and
himself.

Councilwoman Buschman inquired if this particular Ordinance could be expedited for the business
owners. Mr. Harris there is a current provision that states those that serve alcohol are
replied
deviation if the Growler
required to maintain 51% in food sales. Mr. Harris expressed this would be a
bar does not have to meet that provision; and wants to be careful on how the provision is crafted.

Mr.
Councilwoman Buschman asked about the time frame and when this could be put into place.
Williams that that
responded is not in the zoning code. However, Council could amend
provision
the alcohol license by holding a meeting to determine what to include in the provisions.

Councilman Thomas asked Mr. Harris to have the additional information ready by the next Council
meeting. Mr. Harris replied he would work in conjunction with the City Attorney.

City Attorney, Michael Williams reviewed the history of Constitution Week.

Michael Williams, City Attorney stated the Charter is the City’s constitution with numerous issues
that have been identified the previous and current firms. Mr. Williams noted that many of these
conflicts have resulted in These issues have made it a difficult to manage the affairs of
litigations.
the City for the people of Stockbridge.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Mr. Williams stated he has suggested multiple times is to revisit the Charter and make it better and
to make it a document that withstands the test of time.

Mr. Williams stated that as City Attorney, he represented the City and not any of the elected officials
and that his goal is to assist City and draft a Charter, not to address various balances
individually,
of power or allegiances or whatever exists today among the Council, but rather to put in place a
Charter for future Councils and future generations of Stockbridge that they can rely on for stability.

Mr. Williams noted an earlier comment as to whether or not the Mayor should preside over
meetings. The Charter states that the Mayor presides over meetings and the Mayor Pro Tem
likewise presides over meetings in the Mayor's absence. Mr. Williams noted that this process has
been memorialized as such and if there was not a problem with Mayor Rudy Kelley or Mayor Lee
Stuart presiding, there should not be a problem with Mayor Thompson presiding. And, if there is a
problem, it needs to be addressed in the Charter.

Mr. Williams stated the most important conflict that he has expressed over and over again is the
City Council is currently operating as a Council/Manager form of government. However, the Charter
states having a Strong Mayor form of government, in which the Mayor has governed himself in that
fashion.

Mayor Thompson expressed he disagreement in Mr. Williams’ assessment and noted the Charter
was clear in regards to the delegation of power.

Mayor Thompson stated that the code section for the City Manager appointment states that the
Mayor selects the City Manager until it was amended in June of 2014 whereas Mr. Williams’ draft
to fire the City Manager, the Mayor
copy is a conflict and instead of the Mayor having the power
and/or 3 members of Council will have the power to do so. Mayor Thompson stated that Council
members have reminded him of this section of the Charter.

Mayor Thompson noted that while the City Manager has been delegated powers and duties, he
meets with the City Manager on a regular basis and he keeps him abreast and in the loop of the

City’s business and that he has not acquiesced to Council/Manager form of government.

Mayor Thompson stated to the public their right to vote and elect the Mayor and Council and this
proposed form of government removes the Executive branch of government, and he had no input
or consideration.

Mayor Thompson asked Attorney Williams if he drafted the document himself and suggested that
he had been in consultation with members of Council.

Mr. Williams responded that he had not been in consultation to any member of the governing body
and wanted to make that clear, Mr. Williams further stated that this document is based on the GMA
Model Charter and that he has attempted to make modifications to that Charter to mirror as best
that he could under the circumstances the way the City currently operates.

Mayor Thompson stated that Mr. Williams’ statement was inaccurate and the drafted copy
eliminates the Executive branch of the government and gave an example of government. Mayor
Thompson further noted that he didn’t agree with the City Attorney not discussing the document
with the Mayor & Council or City Manager and essentially determined the form of government
himself. Mayor Thompson then stated that he did not appreciate the comments included in the
document.

4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770) 389-7900
September 14, 2015 6:00pm
Councilwoman Gantt noted that this item was brought forward in June 2014 and referenced an
email that was sent to the Clerk at the time, Stephanie Tigner to put the Charter Amendment item
on the Agenda.

Councilwoman Gantt went on to say that there is conflict with the Charter. Litigation of Ray Gibson
and Lee Stuart both resulted out of the conflict with the Charter. Councilwoman Gantt noted that
the City has ambiguous terms at all times, even with whether or not the Agenda could be amended;
the Charter and ordinances have conflicting information.

Councilwoman they all attend GMA training, and they have
Gantt stated that received
recommendations from the GMA representatives to look into changing the Charter.

‘Councilwoman Gantt referenced the City is currently operating in a Council/City Manager form of
government and the statement that the Mayor has made where the citizens would be losing power
is incorrect. The Organizational Chart remains the same: Voters, Mayor & City Council and the City

Manager, and then Department Heads. Nothing changes with Council/Manager form of government
and noted this is a popular form of government, the City has been acting in this form of government
as we have a City Manager.

Councilwoman Gantt noted that every attorney, and investigator has suggested a change to the
Charter.

Mayor Thompson stated that he just wants to get the facts on the table regarding the form of
government and didn’t know who brought the item forward to be in the Charter update book.

Councilwoman Gantt stated that she brought the item forward on June 3, 2014 and referenced the
email, and Mayor Thompson read the email sent to Stephanie Tigner.

The LMIG Paving project was not heard.

Councilman Thomas made a motion to adjourn; second by Councilwoman Buschman. The motion
was
approv.ed,,4-O-1 (Councilman Ford opposed).

Ill,
lhbhN MI

Respectf

mittetl by:
0 lhbht

F1-?;9I?é{‘ , ?
lhbht
lhbhd
lhbht
9 ,?/"f%“]‘/
H74

Vanessa Holiday, City Clerk T" othy L. Thompson’, Mayor

September 14, 2015 6:00pm 4640 N. Henry Blvd. Stockbridge, GA 30281 Phone: (770)389-7900
MARCH 9, 2026

Ryan Anderson

Community Development

DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-01 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 9. Consideration of an
Ordinance to de-annex from the Stockbridge City Limits two parcels within the Manderley Subdivision, representing
Phase 9. The request was made by the owners of the two parcels. The Henry County Board of Commissioners adopted
a resolution on January 20, 2026 to consent to the de-annexation and allow the parcels to become a part of
unincorporated Henry County.

The City Council previously approved eight (8) phases of de-annexation for the Manderley Subdivision (Cases DX-
2024-01 through DX-2024-08). City Staff are now recommending the denial of DX-2026-01 (Henry County's de-
annexation Case #DE-AX-2025-01) due to State annexation laws which require the denial of de-annexation requests
whenever a municipality has any bonded indebtedness.

$0.00
DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-01 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 9.

DENIAL, in accordance with State de-annexation regulations.
De-Annexation Case

#DX-2026-01:
Two Properties in the
Manderley Subdivision

City Council: March 9th, 2026
Cover Letter
from Henry
County Planning
and Zoning
Department on
January 22, 2026
Aerial Photo-Parcels
to De-Annexed

Highlighted in Yellow
Map of 2022
City of
Stockbridge
Annexation
Referendum
with Proposed
De-Annexation
Area
Manderley Subdivision
Zoning Map Excerpt

• Yellow— SR District (Suburban
Residential) — Manderley Subdivision

• Green— PUD District (Planned Unit
Development) — Monarch Village
Subdivision

• Black — Unincorporated Henry
County

• Blue Star — Area of Proposed De-
Annexation
Manderley
Subdivision
Vicinity
Map
Manderley
Subdivision
Parcel Map
Resulting Map
Showing New City
Limits Boundaries
Upon Approval of
DX-2026-01
Legal Requirements for De-Annexation
1. Administrative Requirements:
a. A written, signed application by the owners of no more than ten parcels.
b. Adoption of a signed resolution by the county in which the property is located, consenting to the de-annexation.
c. Submittal of a copy of the application to the municipality.
d. Confirmation by City staff that the procedural requirements for de-annexation have been met by the property
owners.
e. Verification by City staff that the geographic requirements have been met.
f. Approval by the municipality, unless the geographic requirements have not been met.
2. Geographic Requirements:
a. At least one of the parcels must abut/be contiguous to the boundaries of the city limits (not separated from the
city limits by unincorporated areas, a street, a creek or river, or a railroad).
b. No prohibited unincorporated island would be created by the proposed de- annexation.
c. No detrimental effects to the health, safety, and welfare of the property owners of the area to be de-annexed,
or to the area remaining in the municipality (causing the de-annexed area to be cut off from receiving county
services due to the lack of a reasonable access to the de-annexed area).
3. Financial Requirements:
a. The parcels are not located in a municipality that has outstanding general‑obligation bond or revenue‑bond
indebtedness.
Summary of Analysis
1. Administrative Compliance
• Signed de-annexation application submitted to Henry County (two parcels).
• County adopted resolution and transmitted application to the City of Stockbridge.
• Verified use of the 100% method of de-annexation.
• Application meets statutory procedural requirements.
2. Geographic Findings
• Both parcels remain contiguous to City limits before and after de-annexation.
• No unincorporated “island” created.
• City boundary would shift eastward upon approval.
• No impacts to streets, access, or emergency/service vehicle operations.
• No identified health, safety, or welfare concerns.
Summary of Analysis (continued)
3. Financial Considerations
• No outstanding General Obligation (GO) bonds.
• Outstanding revenue bonds through blended component units:
• Urban Redevelopment Agency (City Hall facility).
• Public Facilities Authority (Amphitheater, Cultural Arts Center, public safety facilities).
• Bonds are primarily repaid from City revenues.
• Revenue-backed obligations may be relevant under Georgia de-annexation
statutes.
Financial Considerations: Details
1. Revenue Bonds Supporting City Hall (URA Bonds)
The City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports indicate that the Urban Redevelopment Agency, a blended
component unit, carries long‑term revenue bonds issued for the acquisition, construction, and furnishing of
the City Hall facility. These bonds are expressly stated to be repayable almost entirely from City resources.
• 2023 ACFR: URA revenue bonds outstanding: $8,015,000 as of 12/31/2023
• 2024 ACFR: URA revenue bonds outstanding: $7,160,000 as of 12/31/2024
• Notes to the Financial Statements describe the URA as a blended unit whose debt “is expected to be repaid
almost entirely from the resources of the City.”
2. Revenue Bonds Supporting the Amphitheater / Cultural Arts Center (PFA Bonds)
The Public Facilities Authority (PFA), also a blended component unit, was created to issue bonds for the
construction of the Amphitheater and Cultural Arts Center, among other public facilities. These obligations
likewise rely on repayment from City funding sources.
• ACFR Notes: PFA debt is “expected to be repaid almost entirely from the resources of the City.”
Financial Considerations: Details (continued)
3. Revenue‑Backed Obligations Associated With Police Department‑Related Facilities or Equipment
Both ACFRs show City‑backed debt obligations covering public safety facilities and equipment, including those
funded through the PFA or through City‑wide capital project bonds.
• 2023 ACFR: lists revenue bonds and long‑term liabilities supporting public safety investments.
• 2024 ACFR: debt schedule reflects revenue‑backed financing of City facilities, including public safety
structures and improvements.
4. General Obligation Bonds
Both ACFRs confirm no General Obligation (GO) bonds outstanding for the City of Stockbridge:
• “As of December 31, 2023, the City did not have any general obligation bonded debt outstanding.”
• 2024 ACFR similarly lists no GO debt but identifies substantial revenue bond indebtedness.
Thus, while the City has no GO bonds, it does have revenue bonds whose repayment is structured through City
revenues, including those pledged by blended component units—which may fall under the types of obligations
contemplated in Georgia’s de‑annexation statutes.
Overall Impact
• 8 Phases
• 53 Total Parcels
• Total 3-Year City Tax Revenue: $165,260
• Mix of Confirmed (Phases 1–3) and Calculated (Phases 4–8) totals

Key Takeaway: The cumulative 3-year city tax impact across all phases
totals $165,260, with later phases (4–8) accounting for approximately
68% of the total projected revenue loss.
Confirmed vs. Calculated 3-Year Tax Revenue
by Phase
Confirmed Tax Bill Phases Calculated Phases
• Phase 1 (DX-2024-01): $18,681 (10 • Phase 4 (DX-2024-04): $39,055 (9
parcels) parcels)
• Phase 2 (DX-2024-02): $17,770 (9 • Phase 5 (DX-2024-05): $39,183 (8
parcels) parcels)
• Phase 3 (DX-2024-03): $16,141 (9 • Phase 6 (DX-2024-06): $8,452 (2
parcels) parcels)
• Subtotal (Confirmed): $52,592 • Phase 7 (DX-2024-07): $12,249 (3
parcels)
• Phase 8 (DX-2024-08): $13,729 (3
parcels)
• Subtotal (Calculated): $112,668
Recommendation
Since all of the de-annexation requirements have not been met, the
law states that the Mayor and City Council must disapprove this de-
annexation request (DX-2026-01).

TO: Mayor and City Council

FROM: Ryan C. Anderson, Community Development Director
Brennen Reilly, GIS Analyst/Planner II

CC: Mayor Jayden L. Williams
Shawn Edmonson, City Manager
Valerie Ross, City Zoning Attorney

DATE: March 9th, 2026

SUBJECT: De-Annexation Case #DX-2026-01:
Two Properties in the Manderley Subdivision

Introduction. The owners of two properties within the Manderley Subdivision
submitted a de-annexation application to Henry County Planning & Zoning to request
that their properties be de-annexed from the City of Stockbridge. The Manderley
Subdivision is located at the western edge of the Stockbridge City Limits, bounded by
Walt Stephens Road to the north and Blackall Road to the west. The two properties for
DX-2026-01 have 3.022 +/- total acres in Land Lot 25 of District 12. They comprise
residential lots in the northeastern portion of the subdivision. Table 1 below provides a
list of the two properties by address, parcel number, and owner/applicant.

Table 1—Properties for Proposed De-Annexation
Property Owner(s) /
Property Address Parcel Number Co-Applicant (s)
105 Jasper Dr 013A01022000 Tami Parrish

220 Dewinter Court 013A01021000 Yuka Katsumori

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900

Henry County Government’s Action. According to a De-annexation Evaluation Report
which was prepared by the Henry County Planning & Zoning Department, Henry County
Government received a de-annexation application from the two applicants electronically
on January 22, 2026. The applicants used the 100% method for the proposed de-
annexation. The Department then prepared a De-annexation Evaluation Report for
Henry County’s Case #DE-AX-25-01, which recommended the approval of the proposed
de- annexation. It stated that the subject property was previously zoned ‘R-1’ (Single-
Family Residential) by Henry County prior to its 2022 annexation into the City of
Stockbridge, and that the property would revert back to R-1 upon the successful de-
annexation of the property from the City back into unincorporated Henry County. The
property also had a previous Henry County future land use designation of Low-Density
Residential, which allowed a density of up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre. After the
completion of the DE-AX-25-01 Evaluation Report, the Henry County Board of
Commissioners adopted Henry County Resolution #26-25, dated January 20, 2026, to
approve the de-annexation.

City of Stockbridge’s Receipt of De-Annexation Application Package. The City of
Stockbridge received a copy of the de-annexation application, which was sent
electronically by Henry County on January 22, 2026. There was no cover letter included
in the package, but the Evaluation Report from Henry County Planning and Zoning did list
the included property addresses and parcel numbers.

Background on the Manderley Subdivision. The Manderley Subdivision is
established and well-developed. Table 2 below lists basic facts about it, and the
Appendix contains several pertinent aerial photos and maps.

Table 2—Facts About Manderley Subdivision
Descriptive Factors: Findings:
Current City of Stockbridge Zoning SR (Suburban Residential)
Current City of Stockbridge Future Land Low-Density Residential.
Use Designation
Current Annexation Status Annexed into City via 2022 Referendum.
Estimated Number of Subdivision Lots 79
Number of Subdivision Lots that have 59
been Recently De-Annexed from the City
Name of Subdivider Koppar Corporation.
Number of Development Phases Three.
Years of Recorded Plat Approvals 1983, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1989.*
Status of Subdivision Lots Nearly all are developed with SF homes.
Sizes of Subdivision Lots Approximately one to two acres each.
Years of Home Construction 1985-1997, per Tax Assessors’ records.

*Includes separate sheets for Unit II, and revisions to Unit I & Unit II.

Background on the Surrounding Area. The surrounding area includes Ingle’s Market
and several neighborhood commercial uses flanking Walt Stephens Road; and several
subdivisions to the south, southeast, and east. To the west are several individual
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900

residential parcels outside of Manderley Subdivision, Blackhall Road, the City Limits
Line, and Spivey Lake. The commercial uses are located in the C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) zoning district. The subdivisions to the south, southeast, and east are
located in the PUD (Planned Unit Development) district, while the outlying residential
parcels to the west are zoned ‘SR’ (Suburban Residential). Properties west of Blackhall
Road, in unincorporated Henry County, are zoned ‘R-1’ (Single-Family Residential for
large lots) and ‘RA’ (Residential-Agricultural).

Legal Requirements for De-Annexation. The Official Code of Georgia (O.C.G.A.)
provides legal requirements for de-annexation in O.C.G.A. Sections 36-131, 36-132,
and 36-133. They are summarized in the list below.
1. Administrative Requirements:
a. A written, signed application by the owners of no more than ten parcels.
b. Adoption of a signed resolution by the county in which the property is located,
consenting to the de-annexation.
c. Submittal of a copy of the application to the municipality.
d. Confirmation by City staff that the procedural requirements for de-annexation
have been met by the property owners.
e. Verification by City staff that the geographic requirements have been met.
f. Approval by the municipality, unless the geographic requirements have not been
met.
2. Geographic Requirements:
a. At least one of the parcels must abut/be contiguous to the boundaries of the city
limits (not separated from the city limits by unincorporated areas, a street, a creek
or river, or a railroad).
b. No prohibited unincorporated island would be created by the proposed de-
annexation.
c. No detrimental effects to the health, safety, and welfare of the property owners of
the area to be de-annexed, or to the area remaining in the municipality (causing
the de-annexed area to be cut off from receiving county services due to the lack
of a reasonable access to the de-annexed area).
3. Financial Requirements:
a. The parcels are not located in a municipality that has outstanding
general‑obligation bond or revenue‑bond indebtedness.

Analysis of De-Annexation Proposal:
1. Administrative Requirements – The applicants for the proposed DX-2026-01 de-
annexation submitted a signed de-annexation application form to Henry County,
which was for two parcels. After the County’s review, it adopted a signed resolution
and sent a copy of the application to the City of Stockbridge. The Planning and
Zoning Staff has verified that the acceptable 100 percent method of de-annexation
has been used, and that the de-annexation proposal meets the geographic
requirements, as are discussed below.
2. Geographic Requirements – From the maps appearing in the Appendix, it is apparent
that all of the two parcels within the proposed de-annexation area abut and are
contiguous to other parcels within the Stockbridge City Limits, and they would even
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
continue to do so if the de-annexation is approved. No prohibited unincorporated
island would be created by the proposed de-annexation. Rather, the de-annexed
area would be surrounded on one side by other parcels remaining within the City
Limits. Whenever a new City Limits Map is prepared, the de-annexed area would
push the city limits further east from the resulting boundary created after the approval
of DX-2026-01. Further, there would be no alteration of the existing streets or access
to them; thus, there do not appear to be any health, safety, or welfare issues in terms
of providing needed transportation of County service vehicles or emergency vehicles
in reaching the homes of the property owners within the de-annexed area.
3. Financial Requirements – The City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports (ACFRs)
indicate that the Urban Redevelopment Agency, a blended component unit, carries
long‑term revenue bonds issued for the acquisition, construction, and furnishing of the
City Hall facility. These bonds are expressly stated to be repayable almost entirely from
City resources. According to the City’s 2023 ACFR, the total outstanding URA revenue
bonds amounted to $8,015,000, and according to the 2024 report, the amount
decreased to $7,160,000. Notes to the Financial Statements describe the URA as a
blended unit whose debt “is expected to be repaid almost entirely from the resources of
the City.” Furthermore, the Public Facilities Authority (PFA), also a blended component
unit, was created to issue bonds for the construction of the Amphitheater and Cultural
Arts Center, among other public facilities. These obligations likewise rely on repayment
from City funding sources, as noted in corresponding ACFRs that note that the PFA is
“expected to be repaid almost entirely from the resources of the City.” Both ACFRs
also show City‑backed debt obligations covering public safety facilities and equipment,
including those funded through the PFA or through City‑wide capital project bonds.
Namely, the 2023 ACFR lists revenue bonds and long‑term liabilities supporting public
safety investments, and the debt schedule of the 2024 ACFR reflects revenue‑backed
financing of City facilities, including public safety structures and improvements. Both
ACFRs confirm no General Obligation (GO) bonds outstanding for the City of
Stockbridge. Thus, while the City has no GO bonds, it does have revenue bonds
whose repayment is structured through City revenues, including those pledged by
blended component units—which may fall under the types of obligations contemplated
in Georgia’s de‑annexation statutes.

Further considerations regarding the fiscal impact of the proposed de-annexation
supplement the prospective violation of the financial requirements if the de-annexation
were to be approved. Specifically, the fiscal impact of (1) the previous eight de-
annexation phases of the Manderley subdivision from the City of Stockbridge and (2)
the proposed de-annexation of the two properties is analyzed.
1. Fiscal Impact Report: Residential De-Annexations of Manderley Subdivision
(Phases 1–8) –
a. Purpose – This report documents the municipal ad valorem revenue impacts
associated with residential de-annexations approved by the City of Stockbridge
under Phases 1 through 8 (DX-2024-01 through DX-2024-08). The analysis
evaluates City property tax revenue only for tax years 2022, 2023, and 2024,
based on parcel-level data from the Henry County Tax Assessor. The purpose
of this report is to provide:
• A transparent fiscal impact analysis for de-annexation decisions
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
• Parcel-level documentation for Finance review
• A defensible record for Council and audit purposes
b. Methodology –
• Millage Rate Used: 3.77 mills (City of Stockbridge)
• Formula Used:
City Property Tax = Total Assessed Value × 0.00377
• Confirmed Phases (1–3): Actual City tax amounts verified by year
• Calculated Phases (4–8): Assessed values multiplied by the adopted City
millage rate
• Exclusions: County, school district, and special service district taxes
• Rounding: Nearest whole dollar
c. Phase-by-Phase Parcel Breakdown –
i. Phase 1 – DX-2024-01
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills (2022–2024)
Phase Total: $18,681

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
10 Devon Ct 013-A01128005 $597 $613 $652 $1,862
11 Devon Ct 013-A01132000 $571 $593 $620 $1,784
200 Jasper Dr 013-A01051000 $667 $702 $726 $2,095
205 Jasper Dr 013-A01061000 $632 $659 $689 $1,980
215 Jasper Dr 013-A01060000 $541 $597 $613 $1,751
225 Jasper Dr 013-A01059000 $720 $742 $756 $2,218
235 Jasper Dr 013-A01058000 $585 $612 $640 $1,837
245 Jasper Dr 013-A01057000 $552 $581 $610 $1,743
201 Whitesand Bay Dr 013-A01127000 $593 $621 $642 $1,856
211 Whitesand Bay Dr 013-A01138000 $501 $517 $537 $1,555
ii. Phase 2 – DX-2024-02
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills
Phase Total: $17,770

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
160 Jasper Dr 013A01023000 $640 $678 $715 $2,033
165 Jasper Dr 013A01024000 $579 $606 $642 $1,827
195 Jasper Dr 013A01050000 $664 $708 $753 $2,125
310 Kerrith Dr 013A01039000 $754 $803 $843 $2,400
320 Kerrith Dr 013A01038000 $591 $629 $660 $1,880
325 Kerrith Dr 013A01025000 $674 $715 $754 $2,143
510 Portloe Ct 013A01049000 $658 $690 $727 $2,075
515 Portloe Ct 013A01047000 $641 $671 $706 $2,018
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
520 Portloe Ct 013A01048000 $399 $424 $446 $1,269
iii. Phase 3 – DX-2024-03
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills
Phase Total: $16,141

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
220 Jasper Dr 013A01053000 $666 $704 $741 $2,111
230 Jasper Dr 013A01054000 $687 $720 $754 $2,161
240 Jasper Dr 013A01055000 $678 $705 $743 $2,126
255 Jasper Dr 013A01056000 $646 $685 $721 $2,052
221 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01137000 $629 $666 $706 $2,001
230 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01133000 $625 $655 $693 $1,973
231 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01133000 $621 $654 $691 $1,966
241 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01135000 $710 $735 $769 $2,214
251 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01134000 $626 $658 $681 $1,965
iv. Phase 4 – DX-2024-04
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $39,055

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
115 Jasper Dr 013A01016000 $1,108 $1,344 $1,402 $3,854
145 Jasper Dr 013A01015000 $1,215 $1,479 $1,555 $4,249
150 Jasper Dr 013A01014000 $1,071 $1,307 $1,359 $3,737
340 Kerrith Dr 013A01036000 $1,235 $1,509 $1,584 $4,328
350 Kerrith Dr 013A01035000 $1,224 $1,497 $1,571 $4,292
360 Kerrith Dr 013A01034000 $1,203 $1,469 $1,544 $4,216
370 Kerrith Dr 013A01033000 $1,172 $1,432 $1,505 $4,109
615 Edgecombe Dr 013A01013000 $1,024 $1,251 $1,311 $3,586
625 Edgecombe Dr 013A01012000 $884 $1,324 $1,526 $3,734
v. Phase 5 – DX-2024-05
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $39,183

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
610 Edgecombe Dr 013A01004000 $1,453 $1,572 $1,706 $4,731
620 Edgecombe Dr 013A01005000 $1,354 $1,461 $1,606 $4,421
630 Edgecombe Dr 013A01006000 $1,410 $1,524 $1,678 $4,612
635 Edgecombe Dr 013A01011000 $1,352 $1,460 $1,601 $4,413
640 Edgecombe Dr 013A01007000 $1,394 $1,507 $1,654 $4,555
645 Edgecombe Dr 013A01010000 $1,392 $1,502 $1,653 $4,547
650 Edgecombe Dr 013A01008000 $1,357 $1,468 $1,619 $4,444
655 Edgecombe Dr 013A01009000 $1,355 $1,447 $1,557 $4,359

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
vi. Phase 6 – DX-2024-06
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $8,452

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
110 Jasper Dr 013A01002000 $1,248 $1,565 $1,621 $4,434
120 Jasper Dr 013A01003000 $1,131 $1,416 $1,470 $4,017
vii. Phase 7 – DX-2024-07
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $12,249

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
315 Kerrith Dr 013A01024001 $1,147 $1,425 $1,479 $4,052
170 Jasper Dr 013A01040000 $1,313 $1,648 $1,707 $4,669
175 Jasper Dr 013A01045000 $1,014 $1,255 $1,259 $3,528
viii. Phase 8 – DX-2024-08
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $13,729

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
20 Devon Ct 013A01129000 $1,256 $1,566 $1,623 $4,445
21 Devon Ct 013A01131000 $1,442 $1,802 $1,842 $5,086
200 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01128000 $1,203 $1,470 $1,525 $4,198

d. Cumulative Fiscal Impact –
• Total Parcels: 53
• Total City Revenue Lost (2022–2024): $165,259.55

e. Conclusion – Residential de-annexations approved under Phases 1 through 8
resulted in an estimated $165,259.55 reduction in City of Stockbridge ad
valorem property tax revenue over the 2022–2024 tax years. This analysis
provides a complete parcel-level accounting of City revenue impacts and is
suitable for Finance review, audit documentation, and Council consideration.

2. Fiscal Impact Report: Proposed De-Annexation of Two Properties from Manderley
Subdivision –
a. Methodology – The fiscal impact of the proposed de-annexation was
evaluated using a per-capita cost-of-service methodology based on the
City’s FY 2026 adopted budget. Because municipal operating and capital
expenditures are not tracked on a parcel-specific basis, per-capita
averages were used to estimate the cost of providing municipal services
to the subject properties. The request involves two (2) single-family
residential properties. For fiscal analysis purposes, the properties are
estimated to generate a population of approximately 5 residents, based
on average household size assumptions commonly used for planning
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
analyses.
i. Total Budget per Capita – The City’s total per-capita expenditure
was calculated using the FY 2026 adopted budget for all funds and
the City’s estimated population.

Total Budget per Capita = Total FY 2026 Adopted Budget ÷
City Population

Using the adopted figures:
• Total FY 2026 Adopted Budget: $74,827,124
• City Population: 36,149
This results in a total per-capita expenditure of approximately
$2,070 per person.

ii. Capital Improvement Budget per Capita – To account for the
capital component of municipal service provision, a per-capita
capital improvement cost was calculated using the City’s FY 2026
capital-related funds, including SPLOST, TSPLOST, and other
capital funds.

Capital Improvement Budget per Capita = FY 2026 Capital
Improvement Budget ÷ City Population

This calculation provides context for the City’s long-term
infrastructure and facility investment obligations associated with
continued service provision.

iii. Average Cost of Municipal Service – The average annual cost of
providing municipal services to the subject properties was
estimated by applying the City’s per-capita cost to the estimated
population associated with the eight properties.

Average Cost of Municipal Service = Total Budget per Capita ×
Estimated Population

Using the estimated value:
• $2,070 per person × 5 residents ≈ $10,350

For fiscal conservatism, and to reflect that not all capital
expenditures scale proportionally to small residential areas, the
estimated annual cost of municipal services attributable to the
subject properties is approximately $7,900.

iv. Property Tax Revenue Loss (Two Properties) – City property tax
revenue was calculated using net taxable values from the 2025
Annual Notices of Assessment and the City’s adopted millage rate.

City Property Tax = (Net Taxable Value ÷ 1,000) × 3.77

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
This calculation was applied individually to each of the two
properties and then aggregated. Collectively, the properties
generate approximately $1,125 in annual City property tax
revenue.
v. Summary –
• Average Cost of Municipal Services: approximately $7,900
• City Property Tax Revenue: approximately $1,125
• Net Fiscal Impact: Negative

b. Conclusion – Based on the above analysis, the cost of providing
municipal services to the subject properties exceeds the revenue
generated. Thus, the de-annexation will generate a net negative fiscal
impact.

Conclusion. From the preceding analysis, it appears that though both the
administrative requirements and the geographic requirements have been met for the
proposed de-annexation, the financial requirements have not been met, according to the
law, the two applicants are prohibited from de-annexing their properties from the City of
Stockbridge. The City also subsidiarily recognizes the net negative fiscal impact that the
de-annexation will cause to the City’s property tax base.

Recommendation. Since all of the de-annexation requirements have not been met, the
law states that the Mayor and City Council must disapprove this de-annexation request
(DX-2026-01).

RCA/BTR

Appendix

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
10

APPENDIX:

1. Aerial Photo Showing Two Parcels for De-Annexation

2. Map of 2022 City of Stockbridge Annexation Referendum—
Location of Proposed DX-2026-01 De-Annexation Area

3. Manderley Subdivision Zoning Map

4. Manderley Subdivision Vicinity Map

5. Manderley Subdivision Parcel Map

6. Resulting New City Limits Map Upon the Approval of DX-2026-01

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
11

1. AERIAL PHOTO SHOWING TWO PARCELS FOR DE-ANNEXATION

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
12

2. MAP OF 2022 CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
ANNEXATION REFERENDUM:
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DX-2026-01 DE-ANNEXATION AREA
LEGEND:
Pink Striped Areas – Were Already Part of the City of Stockbridge in 2022
Blue Areas – Were Annexed as Part of 2022 City of Stockbridge Annexation Referendum
Blue Waves – Spivey Lake
Yellow Star—Location of Proposed DX-2026-01 De-Annexation

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
13

3. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION ZONING MAP

KEY:
Yellow—SR District (Suburban Residential) — Manderley Subdivision
Green—PUD District (Planned Unit Development) — Monarch Village Subdivision
Black — Unincorporated Henry County
Blue Star — Area of Proposed De-Annexation

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
14

4. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION VICINITY MAP

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
15

5. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION PARCEL MAP

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
16

6. RESULTING MAP SHOWING NEW CITY LIMITS BOUNDARIES
UPON THE APPROVAL OF DX-2026-01
Yellow Star – De-Annexed Area

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
Henry County
Department of Planning & Zoning
Toussaint Kirk, Director

January 22, 2026

Stockbridge City Hall
4640 North Henry Blvd
Stockbridge, GA 30281
Attn: Shawn Edmondson, City Manager of the City of Stockbridge

RE: Notification of Deannexation Request - Two Properties into Unincorporated Henry County:

The Henry County Planning & Zoning Department has received an application for the deannexation (DE-
AX-25-01) of two properties at 105 Jasper Drive and 220 DeWinter Court within the Manderley
Subdivision, totaling 3.022 +/- acres in incorporated City of Stockbridge. The properties are as follows:

105 Jasper Drive, 013A01022000
220 DeWinter Court, 013A01021000

Enclosed for your review is a copy of the deannexation report prepared by Henry County Planning &
Zoning Staff with application materials, the resolution of acceptance by the Henry County Board of
Commissioners as a result of the January 20, 2026 Board of Commissioners meeting.

Please provide an official letter regarding the City of Stockbridge’s agreement or non-agreement to this
proposed deannexation. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact the
undersigned at 770-288-7526.

Best Regards,

Toussaint Kirk,
Executive Director, Planning and Zoning

Cc: Cheri Hobson-Matthews, County Manager
Kevin Johnson, Deputy County Manager
Rachel Mack, County Attorney
Ryan Anderson, Community Development Director

Enclosures

140 Henry Parkway • McDonough, Georgia 30253
MAIN: (770) 288-7526 • FAX: (770) 288-7550
RESOLUTION

RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSED DEANNEXATION FROM THE CITY OF

STOCKBRIDGE OF TWO (2) PARCEL OF LAND CONSISTING OF A COMBINED

ACRES IN LAND LOT 25 OF THE 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA

WHEREAS, pursuant to 0.C.G.A. Article 8, the Henry County Board of Commissioners have

received application from property owners advising Henry County of their intent to deannex

(DE-AX-25-01) two (2) properties consisting of a combined total of 3.022 +/- aeres in Land Lot 25 of the

District from the municipal boundary of the City of Stockbridge, Henry County, Georgia, being Parcels

013A01022000 and 013A01021000 (see, Exhibit A, attached hereto); and

WHEREAS, in connection with, and immediately following, the annexation, the property owners

seek to change the zoning for the Property from the City of Stockbridge SR (Suburban Residential) zoning

district to the Henry County R-l Residence) zoning district; and

WHEREAS, 0. C. GA. 36-36-131 grants the City of Stockbridge the authority to deannex an

area or areas of the existing corporate limits upon the adoption of a resolution by the governing authority

of the county in which such property is located consenting to such deannexation; and

WHEREAS, Henry County Board of Commissioners analyzed and whether the deannexation may

be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be

deannexed or to the area remaining within the municipality; and

WHEREAS, the Henry County Board of Commissioners has determined that the proposed

deannexation of the Property into the County would not cause a material increase in the burden on Henry

County; and

WHEREAS, the Henry County Board of Commissioners has determined that the proposed

deannexation of the Property into the County would not result in an increase in density and infrastructure

demands which would be detrimental to Henry County and to the health, safety, and welfare of Henry

County and its citizens; and

P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbridge\2025\DE-AX-25-0l\StaffItems\DE-AX-25-Ol Resolutiondocx
WHEREAS, the .....r
Henry County Board of Commissioners has ..-J_I_n.
determined that the proposed
._I. -II-

deannexation would
"HI-.I-llll'lll'l not be detrimental to the health, safety,
-----.-r--|- and welfare of the residents and property
----I--r-II-.

owners
of the area to be remaining within
deannexed or to.the area -.-
..-. . the municipality.

NOW.
THEREFORE, BE
. IT RESOLVED
that, Ipursuant to the provisions of 0. C. GA.
36-36-

131, et seq, Henry County accepts the proposed deannexation (DE-AX-25-01) of the Property, as described

in Exhibit A,
- 'l the municipal boundaries of the
from II of
H City to the
Stockbridge I
'I-uFJ-I- I' corporate boundary of
III'
Henry

on the . that
grounds the proposed the u.._|-.d_|.|.
proposed deannexation would not be detrimental to
.I... Georgia,
County, .-. - - -. _ -_- -

the
health,
__..,. safety, and welfare
_._...- of the residents and property owners
._. of the area
-1... to be deannexed
_l..- or to the

area within the
I.-.-.I|.r
remaining municipality.

.--I-I.Ill.l.r__|.|.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the
. _-. Manager and/or the County Attorney
County -'I-.l- are

authorized
-|--,-ur and directed to send such n0tice(s) as are required by law to
_-_...the City of Stockbridge and/or the

effected property
I.) owners.

BE IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Attorney is
I...-.r.
County authorized to initiate
._|.-.I. .rll._-. such legal

proceedings -.-.:.'.--.--__-..--_-.._.-...u.|.l_..-
-.... as are proper to enjoin the deannexation of the Property and/or initiate and/or engage in the

arbitration proceedings
authorized per 0. C. G.A. 36-36-114.

HIP-.IIII
BE IT RESOLVED that
FURTHER H-HI I-u-this Resolution shall be forwarded - the
us-I'I to I City, fl '-'-
ll together with

such supporting
...__.....:.- documentation as are reasonable and necessary
--__...__ _z to
support the _
same.

P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbridge\2025\DE-AX-25-0 1\Staff Resolutiondocx
BE IT SO RESOLVED THIS 20* DAY OF JANUARY, 2026.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

OF HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA

Carlotta Harrell, Chair

ATTEST

Stephanie Braun, County Clerk

P:\Annexati0ns & Items\DE-AX-25-Ol Resolutiondocx
Deannexation Evaluation Report

Henry County Planning & Zoning CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
DE-AX-25-01

Commission District: 2
Commissioner: Neat Robinson

Report Prepared by: Kenta Lanham, Planner 111

Property Owners: Various Owners

Location: 105 Jasper Drive
220 Dewinter Court

Parcel ID(s): 013A01022000
013A01021000

Request: Deannexation

BOC Meeting: January 20, 2026

Lot Size: 3.022 +/- acres (total)

Zoning History: A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 to

(RZ-66-12) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
denied by the Henry County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues on

January 3, 1967.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 to RM-85

(RZ-67-01) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
withdrawn by the applicant on February 7, 1967, before consideration by the Henry

County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from to RA-lOO

(RZ-67-02) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues
on March 7, 1967.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 and RA-
100 to C-2 (RZ-71-07) which included the subject property as part of a larger
property was approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners on August
30, 1971.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from to

150A* (RZ-82-08) which included the subject property as part of a larger property
was approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners on October 5, 1982.

With the adoption of the ULDC in 2009, those properties zoned RA-150 or RA with one (1)
acre lots were rezoned to R-l (Single-Family Residence). As such, the current zoning of the
Manderley subdivision is now

Previous to annexation by the City of Stockbridge, the properties were zoned R-1

(Single-Family Residence) as illustrated on the Henry County Zoning
P:\Annexations & Manderley (2 lots), 1-20-2026 BOC.docx
Map. which was adopted on November 19, 2013, by the Henry County Board of
Commissioners.

The subject properties were annexed by the City of Stockbridge on January 1,
2023, per Georgia Senate Bill 612 (2021-2022).

Per thezoning map featured on the website and zoning correspondence
received by Planning staff on October 19, 2023, from City of Stockbridge
Community Development Department staff, the subject properties are zoned SR
(Suburban Residential).

Adjacent properties are as follows:

North: City of Stockbridge
South: City of Stockbridge
East: City of Stockbridge
West: City of Stockbridge Unincorporated Henry County

Current Land Use: Single-Family Residences

Future Land Use: The City of Stockbridge 2024 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property
as Low Density Residential (up to 1-4 units per acre). Previous to annexation by
the City of Stockbridge, the properties had a FLUM designation of Low Density
Residential (up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre, net).

Proposed Zoning: As per the application materials, the residents of two (2) properties, consisting of
a combined total of 3.022 +/- acres, within the Manderley subdivision propose to
deannex the subject properties from the municipal boundaries of the City of
Stockbridge to the unincorporated limits of Henry County. Upon deannexation, the
properties would be zoned (Single-Family Residence), which is the previous
zoning designation of the properties previous to annexation by the City of
Stockbridge.

Comments: The owners of the subject property are requesting the 100% deannexation method
into the City of Stockbridge. According to the Code Georgia Annotated,

0. C. GA 36-36-131, municipal corporations can deannex incorporated area or
areas which directly abut the existing municipal boundary or would directly abut
on the municipal boundary if it were not otherwise separated from the municipal
boundary by lands owned by the municipal corporation or some other political
subdivision, by lands owned by this state, or by the width of any street or
street right of way; any creek or river; or any right of way of a railroad or other

public service corporation.

The application packet, including the written and signed applications of all of the
owners of all of the land proposed to be deannexed, and containing a complete
description of the lands to be deannexed was submitted to Henry County via
Sagesgov on December 30, 2025, in accordance with 0.C.G.A. 36-36-113.

As per the application materials, the residents of two (2) properties, consisting of
a combined 3.022 +/-acres, within the Manderley subdivision propose to deannex
the subject properties from the municipal boundaries of the City of Stockbridge to
the unincorporated limits of Henry County. Upon deannexation, the properties

P:\Annexations & Manderley (2 lots), l-20-2026 BOC.docx
would be zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residence), which is the previous designation
of the properties previous to annexation by the City of Stockbridge.

The City of Stockbridge 2024 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property
as Low Density Residential (up to 1-4 units per acre). Previous to annexation by
the City of Stockbridge, the properties had a FLUM designation of Low Density
Residential (up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre, net).

The Future Land Use Map (FLUM), as part of the Henry County 2045

Comprehensive Plan, designation of the surrounding unincorporated Henry
County properties is Medium Density Residential, which is described in the
Comprehensive Plan as areas consisting of single family homes on a single lot.
New development in these areas should provide pedestrian facilities, including
sidewalks and crosswalks, and have an appropriate streetscape. Walkable
neighborhoods should be created with appropriate parks and open space. The
Medium Density Residential FLUM designation supports developments with a

density of up to 4.0 dwelling units per acre, net.

The subject property is located within an area designated as a Suburban Mix on
the Henry County Development and Infrastructure Strategy Area Map. The vision
for Suburban Mix areas is to accommodate a variety of types of residential
neighborhoods that are predominantly single family, as well as some supporting
areas of retail (shopping) and workplaces. A system of multi-use trails supports
both transportation and recreational goals with sidewalks prioritized around
schools, parks, and designed community centers.

Per 0.C.G.A. 36-36-134, in the event of a deannexation, a municipality may, but
is not required to, continue to provide any services to the property which it was

providing immediately prior to the deannexation, provided that the county and
municipality have agreed to terms and conditions for the municipality continuing
to provide such services.

Per 0. C. GA. 36-36-13], a municipality is granted the authority to deannex an area
or areas of the existing corporate limits upon the adoption of a resolution by the

governing authority of the county in which such property is located consenting to
such deannexation. If the governing authority of the county consents to the
deannexation and the deannexation conforms with the requirements of 0. C. G.A.
Article 8, the governing authority of the municipal corporation shall approve such
deannexation unless it that the deannexation would be detrimental to the
health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be
deannexed or to the area remaining within the municipality.

It is Planning & Zoning opinion that the deannexation would not be
detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners
of the area to be deannexed or to the area remaining within the City of Stockbridge.

Exhibit Maps

Application Packet

P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbridge\2025\DE-AX-25-01\Staff ltemsUDE-AX-25-01, Manderley (2 lots), 1-20-2026 BOC.docx
149

STATE OF GEORGIA

COUNTY OF HENRY

October S, 1982

The regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Henry County was held
in the Administration Building on October 5, 1982 at 9:35 a.m.

Those present were:

Edward H.
Whiddon, Sr., Chairman, presiding
William M. Gardner, Vice Chairman
James R. Brannan, Commissioner
u. D. Patrick, COmmissioner
Marion Hall Simpson, Commissioner

Rabun, County Administrator; Philip Keen, County Attorney; Beverly McLeod,
Ron
Clerk; Shedd, Zoning Administrator; Sherri DeCinque, Henry Herald; Pat Murdock,
Tom

Henry Neighbor; Robert Clough, WZAL; Lewis Hurd; Mac lrvin; Phil Kelley; and
several visitors.

The Reverend Lindsey Smith, Associate Pastor of Bear Creek Baptist Church,
gave the invocation and the Chairman led in the pledge to the flag.

The Chairman explained to those present that the County Administrator would
open the bids at this time and that the bids would be awarded later during the
meeting after tabulation was complete.

Officer James Dunlap, a Deputy Jailer, was presented with a Letter of
Commendation bravery exercised by him on September ll, 1982 when he rescued
for the
jail inmates during a fire. The Chairman expressed his appreciation to Officer
Dunlap and Sheriff Chaffin who also was present.

Mr. Charles Bailey Mill Road spoke to the Board regarding damage
Shaw of
that had been done road by garbage trucks.
to the Commissioner Patrick stated
that he and Road Superintendent Dickey would go to the road and investigate the
matter. Mr. Shaw expressed his thanks.

Mr. Robert Whitaker of Camp Fortson came before the Board to present a.deed
copy of a previously unnamed road (currently know as Russell Road). He wanted to;
verify that the road was a county road. The Chairman stated that if Mr. Whitakeri
could provide the County Attorney with a photostat of the l903 deed that the
matter would be investigated.

Mr. Lewis representing J. P. Evans (a developer), presented
Hurd, who was

copies of plats assist them in reviewing Mr. Evans' rezoning
to the Board to

request change From C-2 and RM-75 to R-lSOB on Highway 351, LL 22 8 43 of the 6th
district. Change was requested for the future development of Windhaven Plantation
Subdivision and the Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Hurd explained that
since part of the property was zoned C-2 and part RM-75, the desire was to zone
both landlots residential. Commissioner Brennan made the motion to approve this

rezoning request and Commissioner Patrick seconded. Motion passed with unanimous;
approval.

A preliminary plat approval for J. P. Evans, Windhaven Planation, Unit Two,

was granted on a motion made by Commissioner Simpson with the stipulation that it
pass soil and erosiOn and road specs. Commissioner Patrick seconded and motion

passed unanimously.

The Zoning Administrator presented a re20ning request change of Zack's

Properties from C-I to C-h on the corner of Hwy. I38 and Hwy. l55 for a convenience
store (Nite 0wl#l3). C-A was requested since Properties would like to seH
beer and wine at the proposed location, LL 133 of the llth district. The Planning
Board recommended approval. Since a store had previously been at that location,
150

Page two v

October S, l982

Commissioner
I Brannan inquired of the Zoning Administrator if this request would He .

grandfathered. _

Zoning Administrator stated that the grandfather clause does
The

not apply when there is a changez of tenant, a considerable amount of expansion,
use, Section 8-6, Page 68, of the Zoning Manual. Mr. Wayne Staples,
or a change in I _

Mrs. Davidson, Mrs. Crumbley, and Mrs. Louise Fitzgerald, concerned citizens who .

were present, opposed the request,
stating that this was
. ,_ a dangerous intersection,

believed the
store would _ increase the number _
of DUls on the Road if it sells beer
and ,_
wine, and do Inot want the added litter that could possibly result.
Commissioner Patrick
I I
inquired about the lot size and Zack Hinton informed the
Board thatapproximately 270' x 270', the lot has been recurbed with
the lot was

underground drainage, there will
I I be an access lane coming off of Hwy. I38 and 155, .

and that the request has been
approved by State D.0.T. Commissioner Tom Moreland I .. .

and the State Fire Marshall. Stating that since it Iwas already zoned
_ .I C-l, the a

Vice Chairman made
I a motion to rezone the lot C-h. Commissioner
m Patrick seconded

and motion passed by

quorem with Commissioners Brannan and Simpson opposing.

At this ,.
time, the Zoning Administrator presented a beer and wine application _

for Nite Owl #l3 for the Board's-approval. He advised the Board that the manager's

checkI from the Police Department had notI been received. Commissioner Patrick
II - .

I a
to table the request until 9:30 a.m., October IS, 1982.

made the motion A .

Commissioner Simpson seconded and all were
. in favor.

Mr. Richard Chatham of Koppar Corporation presented a rezoning request

change
: from RA-ZOO to R-ISOA in ILL 7, 8, and 26 of the thh district (former _

Country property).
Planning Board had approved the request The

subject to the proper letter from the Water Authority; and also approved a vari- m

ance of the required 30' sidelines. Mr. Chatham ._
explained
I to the Commissioners .

that the Planning Board had not approved the request two years ago; subsequently,
his corporation had upgraded the subdivision project which would include a

community center, beach, pool, clubhouse, and tennis court with
one-acre lots.

Mr. Chatham stated that the R-lSOA zoning was requested because of needed flexi- _

bility to shift the houses if necessary and maintain the land mass and that his
corporation would be willing to work with any restrictive covenants that the

Board required. Commissioner Simpson inquired about the flood way of the Lake I

Spivey dam located inthe area and stated that in the final approval, he would not
vote for the
n project if the flood wayI is not indicated on the preliminary plat. _

Mr. Chatham stated that he was in receipt of a letter from the State indicating

that the dam was safe. Commissioner Brannan made a motion to approve
the rezon-

ing request . and the Vice Chairman seconded. All were
_ . in favor.

A preliminary plat approval of Unit l (66.92 acres) for the above project was :

presented.
I Commissioner Brannan made the motion to approve the preliminary plat

subject to a soil and erosion plan, passing of restrictive covenants, approved

by the Board of Commissioners, and an indication of how the community property .

(community center, beach, pool, etc.) n
I will be divided. The Vice Chairman second-

ed and motion passed unanimously.

E. Kordet, who was present,
Robert a presented a conditional use request for

additional greenhouses at LL 73 of the 8th district, containing 5.l6 acres located
on IRiver Road. The Planning Board had approved the conditional use subject to
a) a one-year review,
b) shrubsI be planted and all landscaping of property to be

properly done prior to any building permits for requested additional greenhouses,

and c) that IKordet build only three greenhouses in l933 and three greenhouses Iin

lSBh. The Zoning I
Administrator
explained to the Board that the above stipulations

were placed on this request due to the public input obtained at the Planning
meeting. The Vice Chairman made the motion to approve the conditional
use subject to the same aforementioned stipulations. Commissioner Brannan
seconded and all were in favor.

came before the Board to present a rezoning request change from
Mike Clanton
M-l to body repair shop at LL l55 of the 7th district located on the
C-h for a

corner of Highway Barn Road and Hwy. #2 (formerly known as Holbrook Machinery,

lnc.). The Planning Board had recommended approval with appropriate screening of
the fenced areas. Commissioner Patrick made the motion to approve the rezoning

request change to C-h with appropriate screening installed and the Vice Chairman
seconded. Motion passed unanimously
Page three

October 5, l982

Mr. Ralph Keenan, who was present, requested a variance to convert single

family dwelling into a duplex in LL l59 of the 7th district located on Weeping
Willow Lane. Planning Board had denied on the basis that it was spot zoning.
Mr. Ralph Painter, the adjacent landowner to the property in question, opposed
the request since he feared a constant turnover of residents if duplexes were
allowed. In view of the fact that this would possibly set a precedent for future

requests, Commissioner Brannan made a motion to deny the request. Commissioner
Patrick seconded and motion passed by quorem with the Vice Chairman and Commissioner
Simpson opposing.

Zoning Administrator presented a conditional exception for Richard's
The
Paint Body Shop to have an impound lot in LL l35 of the 7th district located
and
on Highway 8l East. The property is currently zoned R-BS and is classified as a
non-conforming use, but is allowed to operate as a use under

provisions. The Planning Board had earlier denied due to the fact
that the impound lot would not be in the proper location. Mr. Richard Reece was

present to answer questions. The Vice Chairman made the motion to table the

request and Commissioner Patrick seconded. Motion passed by quorem with Commis~
sioner Simpson opposing. The Chairman advised the public that the new zoning
manual does not have a classification for an impound lot and that the Board will
resolve the issue in the near future.

Senator Janice Horton requested that the Board proclaim October 17-23, 1982N
as Business Women's The proclamation was presented to the Board

by Mrs. Hazel Gardner and the Vice Chairman read to those present. Commissioner
Brannan made adopt the resolution affecting the request and
the motion to
Commissioner Simpson seconded. Motion passed unanimously.

Ken Garage requested a conditional exception for a storage
Belcher of Ken's
lot in LL 33 of the l2th district
on N. Henry Blvd., at Highland Village. Property
is presently zoned C-l. The Planning Board denied since the Board decided it was
not the best use for the property. Commissioner Simpson, however, made the
motion to approve the request with an automatic one-year review and for the lot
not be used for an impound lot. Commissioner Patrick seconded and all were in
favor.

Mr. Clarence Powell of Powell's Wrecker and Huskey Wrecker Services spoke
to the Board regarding an impound lot for the county and regarding 13h3 East
Atlanta Road where he had been operating a business under a use.

His attorney, Mr. Tankersiy, requested the Board to inform Mr. Powell of the
conditions that he should meet before he can obtain a county license.
Commissioner Simpson made the motion authorize
Zoning Administrator to
to the

gather information for the Board's review of this matter. The Zoning Administra~
tor stated that a permit would be issued to Mr. Powell when certain questions
could be cleared up. Representatives from Wanda's Wrecker Service and another
company were also present to support the request for county designated impound
lots.

A review was conducted on a conditional use for A. C. Aukerman for
a mobile night watchman for his business in Hampton.
home for a Property
presently zoned M-l and is LL l66 of the 6th district, located at 595 N. Steel
Drive, Hampton, Planning Board recommended approval to continue one year.
The Vice Chairman made the motion to grant the conditional use and Commissioner
Brannan seconded. Motion passed by quorem with Commissioner Simpson opposing.

Ron County Administrator, presented an employment contract for
Rabun,
Sharon Williams of Cobb County, to be employed as a temporary part-time computer
operator in the Commissioners' Office at a rate of $l0/hour beginning October 9,
l982 and ending November l9, l982. Commissioner Brannan made the motion to
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract and the Vice Chairman seconded.
Motion passed unanimously.

The purchase of the following used equipment was read into the minutes:
157.

Page four

October 5, 1982

a. Used fire vehicles:
SERIAL DATE OF
MODEL 5 MAKE NUMBERS COST PURCHASE

Two (2) 1968 Pierch Fire Trucks $ 7.750 Io/A/82
on a Ford chassis, 1,000 gal. 7,750 lO/h/82
pumper, 500 gal. water tank,
l76-inch wheel base, gasoline
engine, air brakes, 5 speed trans-

mission

On a motion made by Commissioner Brannan, the minutes for September 7, 20,
21, and 24, 1982 were approved, subject to one correction. The Vice Chairman
seconded and all were in favor.

On a motion made by Commissioner Simpson and seconded by Commissioner
Brannan, the following budget amendment was approved. Budget Amendment No. A
which transfers $735 From Sheriff-Office Equipment to Jail-Office Equipment (to
purchase AIR PAK for Jail). All were in favor.

Two Water and Sewer presented for the Board's
Authority contracts were

approval. Contract No. 16, Indian Creek Water
Supply Project, Dam, Spillway,
and Access Roads. Contract No. 17, Indian Creek Water Supply Project, Raw Water

Pump Station, and Raw Water Main. The County Attorney advised the Board that
the contracts appear to be in order. Commissioner Brannan made the motion to

allow the Chairman to sign both contracts and Commissioner Patrick seconded.
Motion passed by quorem with Commissioner Simpson opposing on the grounds that
he would not approve if it in any way restricted public access onto the public
property of the proposed new reservoir.

At time, the County Administrator declared for those present the bids
this
for a 1250 GPM Two Stage Centrifugal Pumper Truck for the Fire Department.
new

They were: Harless, low bid, at $137,783 with a finance rate of 10.9h%, Maxim
from Vitco and Safety with no financing provided, American La France at
Fire
$155,A50 9.25%, and FMC at $160,59h at 8.5%.
at Mr. J. R. Roberts of Harless

was present and explained to the Board that if Harless is awarded the bid, the
interest rate would not accrue until approximately April, 1983 when the truck is
delivered and accepted by the Fire Chief, and the first 20% downpayment would not
be due until July, 1983. He also stated that the quoted interest rate would be
firm. Mr. Roberts advised that the truck has a Zh-foot ladder and that the
Insurance Services Office (ISO) no longer sets a 15-year limit as long as the

pumper can perform at the required rate. Commissioner Brannan made the motion
to table the bids and Commissioner Patrick seconded. All were in favor.

On a motion made by Commissioner Brennan and seconded by Commissioner
Patrick, the meeting was recessed for lunch at 1:00 p.m. Motion passed unani-
mously.

The meeting came back into session at lchS p.m. Those present were all

Commissioners, Ron Rabun, Philip.Keen, Beverly McLeod, Tom Shedd, Chief of
Police Elkins, and several visitors.

As five beer and wine violation hearings had been scheduled for this time,
the Chairman stated that the Board would hear all the evidence in all cases and
then pass judgment at the end if there were objections;
no Attorneys Richard
Mylam and A. J. Welch stated they had no objections. The pertinent facts are
listed below with each violation.

Brannan's Gas and Oil had its license suspended 21 September 1982 on an alleged
sell of beer to a minor by a Mr. Horace Paul Brannan. Location of store is
l-75 and SR 351 and date of alleged offense was September 17, 1982 at 7:15 p.m.
Detective Tony Selph was sworn in and advised that he, Detective Sgt. Hill, and
a 17-year old black juvenile, Johnny Glover, Jr. went to the location.
Johnny Glover, Jr. was sent into the store with a marked $5 bill, Serial #
F936331613, and came out with a sack which contained a six-pack of Schlitz malt
11
153

Page five

October S, 1982

liquor. The stated $5 bill was recovered from the cash register and Glover,
according to Detective Selph, identified Horace P. Brannan as the one who sold
him the beer. According to testimony, no ID had been solicited. A. L. Brannan, Sr
stated that Glover did not positively identify Horace Brannan as the seller, that
he felt he had been and that the Police Department "was working against

Detective Kettering was sworn in to give testimony on
Glen General Store who
had its suspended on September 2h, 1982 for allegedly selling to a minor
license
on September 3, 1982 at 10:00 p.m. DetectiVe Kettering said he responded to a
call that three juveniles had been observed buying beer, i.e., Joseph Bastarache,
12 years old, Jeffery Abernathy, l6 years old, and Daniel Peake, 15. Detective
Kettering advised that upon questioning Kimberly L. Phelps she did admit to
selling the beer. William E. Holliway, Division Manager of those stores in
Georgia and owner of license, asked Mrs. Debbie Georgie and Mrs. Jerry Rogers,
employees of the store who were present, to verify the allegation that
Detective Kettering had stated that Miss Phelps is fired, you will lose your

Attorney A. J. Welch, who was representing Thomas 81 Package
A. Nash of Highway
Store, asked that the witnessses in this be
They were:
case identified.
Detective Selph, Detective Sgt. Hill, Johnny Glover, Jr. The alleged violation
occurred on or about 6:00 p.m., September 17, 1982 and license was suspended
September 21, 1982. Detective Selph stated that this store was a spot check,
that Glover was sent in with a $5 bill, Serial #936331610, and did buy a l-quart
bottle of Schlitz malt liquor. Glover identified Eugene Tschudy as the seller
of the beer. Mr. Nash, owner of the license, was sworn in and answered several

questions.

Detective Selph was again sworn in to give testimony on al alleged violation of
selling beer to a minor at Red Ace Fuel Stop on Jonesboro Road at l-75.
Detective Selph stated that Glover was sent in with a $10 bill, Serial F29602115B,
and returned with a six-pack of Schlitz malt liquor. Selph also stated that this
was a spot check with no previous complaints. According to Detective Selph,
Glover identified Nancy L. Howard as the seller of the beer, however, the $10
bill was not recovered. Detective Hill was sworn in at approximately 3:10 p.m.
Glover was sworn in and stated that he had purchased beer and not
Schlitz beer.

At this point, the Board by unanimous vote, recessed at 3:30 p.m. and reconvened
at 3:h0 p.m. to continue discussion of
alleged violations at the Red Ace
the
(Delta) Fuel Stop. Paul A. Melton, manager of Red Ace, was sworn in and stated
that he instructs his employees on the selling beer to minors and/or on holidays,
that he had hired Ms. Howard, and that she was paid an hourly wage and did not
receive a sales commission. John W. Williams, owner of the license, was sworn in
and stated that their corporation does not condone selling to minors since they
believe it to be morally wrong and is not good business.

Detective Tony Selph was sworn in to testify for an alleged selling of beer to a
minor by Lonnie 0. Thurman at Love's Package Store, Hwy. 133 and 42 South, on or
about 7:50 p.m., September 17, 1982. License was suspended September 21, 1982.
Detective Selph stated that Glover, Jr. was again sent into the store with a $5
bill, Serial #936331613, and came back to the car with a six-pack of Schlitz malt
liquOr. Selph stated that Thurman had stated to him that he had sold
Detective
Glover $5 bill was recovered from
the beer, and cash register, and the
Police Department had responded to this store due to complaints.

After hearing from each of the attorneys for the license holders, a motion was
made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Patrick to adjourn into executive session
to deliberate their findings.

The Board returned approximately 25 minutes later and issued their findings.
154

Page six

October 5, I982

After some initial discussion and comments, a motion was made by Mr. Gardner and
seconded by Mr. Patrick to suspend the licenses of all violators for a period of
30 days retroactive to the date of the original suspension. Commissioners

Whiddon, Gardner, and Patrick voted for and Simpson and Brannan against.

Mr. Rabun, County Administrator, presented bids on various items at this
time.

Antifreeze: Interstate Ford.Sales $1,581.10
Downey Auto Store l,l85.00
Mercer Truck 5 Tractor l,l6I.50
C 8 H lnterprises l,lA5.00
Parker Brothers l,098.00
Beaudry Ford l,083.50

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner to accept the bid of $l,098 from Parker Brothers,
their being a local vendor. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brennan. All were in
favor with Mr. Simpson abstaining.

Gasoline: Ward Oil Company $l.0l65 per gallon
May 8 Carter Oil Co. l.0thS
Anderson Oil Company l.003l25
Jones Petroleum .9975

This is an average gallon for the four types of fuel for which bids
price per
were solicited. Motionby Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr
was made Patrick to
award the bid to Jones Petroleum Company at an average price per gallon of
$.9975. Motion passed unanimously.

Uniforms
Police Dept. Burdon Uniform Company $l8,759.h0
Martins' Service Uniforms 16,236.72

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Brannan to accept the low bid
of $l6,236.72 from Martin's Service Uniforms. All were in favor.

Uniforms
Sheriff's
Dept. Banner Uniform Company 8 7,676.25
Burdon Uniform Company 6,360.00
Martins' Service Uniforms 5,827.50

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson to accept the low bid
of $5,827.50 from Martins' Service Uniforms. The vote was unanimous

Two mobile
radios Motorola S 2,986.00
Custom Installation 2,924.00

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson to award the bid to

Custom Installation. All were in favor.

Two walkie
talkies Custom Installation 5 1,880.00
Motorola l,696.00

Motion was made by Mr. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Gardner to accept the low bid
of $1,696.00 from Motorola. The vote was unanimous.

Upon motion by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson, the meeting adjourned
at 6:!5 p.m.
155

Page seven

October 5, 1982

m mfg 24w:
P. eod, Edward H. Whiddon, Sr., Chairman

William M. Gardner, Vice Chairman

es R. Brannan, Commissioner

w. C
1,7
Patrick, oner

mil. 4
4i;
Marion Simpson, C ssi er

.25 .EwEsuou
tcwmua Home-x<:m_D he

amE
Ema.

Ho:
mE. .

EoEqEm .25 .EmEzoou

H9m~.x<.mo
Ema.
amE m

NZ :2 Da EU
wszON <1 mm 3. mm 5. mm Q: in 5 NU U

We?

AVM
3 VT!

mm: 2:0 .3958:
6:0 0; Ho.mN*<.wO 9.5.. EOU :20: we: mD ZH DEA.. mo
2 5 mm Oak 5.. H5 U> EU

92.:
39:

mE. .
ll

AVM
SVTI
HO N

MQOHQCB

HENRV COUNTY
(5% (Nam m E? 2'": 1|;

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY COUNTYg, GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY

COUNTY BOARD OF CpMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDAISLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.
A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING IS ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.

THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING; DEPARTMENT WILL ON LY CONDUCT
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE

VISIT TO SCHEDULE A

MEETING'OINLINE.

N0 PRE-APPLICA TI0N MEETING WILL BE C OiND UCTED WITHO UT AN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASEFEEL FREE TO CONTACT OI IR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 288-7526.

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY RELATED BOARD MEETINGS Is:
140 HENRY BARKWAY

McDONOUGH, GEORGIA 30253
HENRY COUNTY

CQU
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
nil.-

Deannexation A Iicatlon Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED -
NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED C(HIIES PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

Must be obtained from a current planjn'er, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your application. (OPTIONAL)

Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attorney will be

contacted with regards to a
request. Only owners and those listed as

applicant or agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a

request

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be

notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be notalgized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent.

Residential Required for any deanexation request which includes any residential

Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property ow}ner(s) name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or land? surveyor registered in the State of
(11 x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines; 3) include a notation as to the total

acreage or square footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
setbacks, road frontage correct
scale, north arrow and present zoning

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director

Procedures\0ftice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATtONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
.itE

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of Commissioners of Henry County, Georgia.

1. We, the undersigned, all of the owners of all real, property of the territory described herein respectfully request that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the County
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and complies with requirements established in
0. C. GA Title 36, Chapter 36. The description of such territory is attached hereto.

O'WNER(S) NAME{S) 1693;

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS

DEANNEXATION FROM DHAMP'rON GROVE EJMCDONOUGH WOCKBRIDGE

LOCATION/ADDRESS 0 g 5 (r5 54' R I Vi. 00 3 0&5!

LAND LOT/DISTRICT ACERAGE . 7

PARCEL ID NUMBER 0 o o zzooo ZONING DISTRICT(S)

ONE FORM PER PROPERTY USE IF REQUIRED.

SIGNATURB(S) DATE l9.

DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS SIGN AS NAME APPEARS ON THE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

Iv

w ""5:
em 0

NOTAR S G ATURE AND SEAL

Pre-applicetion meeting:

Application checked by: Title; Date:

BOC Decision: Date:
BOC Meeting Date:
Signature: Date:

Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning ApplicatidnMPPLlCATlONS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexatton\Deannexation Application, revised
9~28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY a

COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
ggwnv
60?? I'

OWNERSHIP VERIFEICATION
The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands described in the attached deannexation application, which
proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands described in the application is as follows:

OS S M? I t 00/5 ni M 2f) 2/6]
Location/Address

Parcel ID Number 0 l A

name(s) firm 1' f Percentage of interest: [00

Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this 6 day of W, 026%

Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this ab day of 22m [2471/ ,

Notary Public (Seal)

Forms\Zoning Application\APPUCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
"i"31!? '33.

Residential. Declaration
In order to com ply with the United States Department of Justice" s
procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, Subpart B, Section 51. 28, the following information' required for
Is

the deannexation of any residential properties. Must be completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation). Use as many forms as needed.

Location/Address /b { 5.0 S De, i V 57mm f. i D 6": L8

Parcel ID Number 0'13 0 0 lb 'LLGOD

1. Total number of existing residential structures located oh the parcel:

2. Description of the residential structures located the subject property as listed above:

"PM03111 R0139 I

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each structure: \

4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Age Sex Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS II? NEEDED

542: i
'5 V VOW

5. Henry County Commission District: Z
6. City Council Voting District:

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, the above listed information and all attached supporting
documents
are'cornplete and accurate.

$3 WW

Applicant Signature Date 5 i525
2: \Planning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlON5 Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application revised
9- 28- 2023. docx
w/ HENRY COUNTY

'HzfguRv COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Campaign Disclosrire Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), property Owner(s), agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as many forms as
needed.

l/APPLICANT

CHECK ONE: PROPERTY OWNER i AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made; within two (2) years immediately preceding the of this application campaign

contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts having in the aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the
Henry County Board of Commissioners who will consider the application?
Yes No L
applicant/property owner/agent and/or attorney representing the applicant must the following information

with the Henry County Board of Commissioners within ten ('10) days: after this application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam ai n Contribution to Board Member

77f -

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct; this 6 day

3Q L. ,
cams,

\ \ our

Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name Printed Signature of Applicant/ Property .Owner/Agent/Other

,Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
n, I
day of;

, (2Q 2'3.

UN TY
Notary Public (Seal)
l n

Z:\Planning_20ning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLICAT.l0r\lS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
LETTER OF INTESNT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not subject to public hearing requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property from the City of Stockbridge for the

following reasons: 5

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to
existing unincorporated areas and
complies with requirements established in O.C.C-:E.A Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) I prefer to live in Unincorporated Henry County?
3) I prefer not to live within the city limits of Stockbridge.

Therefore, l respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend County
services to include the same.

Additional comments:

ure

101, M \ will 5L;
Printed Name Date
Deannexation

Application

HENRY COUNTY
{3: OVE U m an I;

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY
COUNTY; GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR
DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY
COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE
NON-REFUNDAELE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.
A PRE-APPLJCATION MEETING IS ADVISED, BUT NOT
REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING
DEEARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT PRE-
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, AND THURSDAY OF
EACH PLEASE
VISIT
HTTP://WWW.CO.H.ENRY.GA.'US/.DEPARTMENTS/M_-R/PLANNING-ZONING TO SCHEDULE A
MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE-APPLICA TION MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED WITHOUTAN
APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT
OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770)

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY
RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:
140 HENRY PARKWAY

McDONOUGH, GEORGIA 30253
HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
21mm! 2t

Deannexation A lication Checklist
ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO
CDNSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED -
NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED COPEES
PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

'Must be obtained from a current planher, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your
application. (OPTIONAL)
Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of

Only owners and those listed as ajpplicant or agent/attorney will be
contacted with regards request; Only owners and those listed as
to a

applicant or agent/attomey have authorization to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be
notarized. :

Campaign Required for all pr0perty owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be
notargized.
Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent. i

Residential Required for any deanexation request which includes any residential
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last five
years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or Iandi surveyor registered1n the State of
(11 x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all p1ope1ty lines; 3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or tootage of the subject property; and 4) include all
square
setbacks, road frontage, correct scale, north arrow, and present zoning
classification.

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director.

2: \Planning_Zoning\0ffice Procedures\0ffice
Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATl0NS- Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised
9- 2023 docx
M1: HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of Commissioners of Henry County, Georgia.

I. We, the
undersigned, all of the
owners of all real property of the
territory described herein respectfully request that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the deannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend
the COunty
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing
unincorporated areas and complies with requirements established in
O.C.G./l Title 36, Chapter 36. The description of such territory is
attached hereto.

OWNER(S)NAME(S) WU i'

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL

DEANNEXATION FROM DHAMPTON EIMCDONOUGH

LOCATION/ADDRESS L20 Mimi/129., ,
a . S'/ :
L DGIQKLJ,E ,
Gk ,
33281 ,7

LAND LOT/DISTRICT

ACERAGE 4L6 73/ .

PARCEL ID NUMBER 013 Q o; o z 4000 ZONING DISTRICTS) 5 8. W7

ONE FORM PER PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS ll"
REQUIRED.

SIGNATURE(S) _(4LW I; ,

DATE i i3

DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUS'I' SIGN AS 'I'IIEIR NAME APPEARS ON DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF
REQUIRED.

:5"; 9031-10 /
N TAR SIGNATU E AND s L
mi; .5
C2015 c; g ,

use only)

Pre-application meeting: Title: Date:

checkedlby: Title: Date:

BOC Meeting Date: BOC Decision: Date:

Planning Signature: Date:
Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATl0NS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
\y HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING & ZONING
OWNERSHIP VERIEICATION
The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands
described-in the attached deannexation application, which
proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands
described in the application is as follows:

Location/Address by [MA/F11 . i
m, (4+ 3023/
Parcel ID Number 0 I300; 0 Zl 000

name(s) awn/k
K 19m mb # 1. ,
Percentage of interest: 1042.; 0

Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this
l i;& day of Wail,
lg

v F4 W
Property Printed
Signature of Property Owner

Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 4Lday mm of 2:?34

Notary Public (Seal)

Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCAT|ONS -

Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF
HENRY
6'61:an n: rat
PLANNING & ZONING

Residential Declaration
In order to comply with the United States Department of
procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended,
Subpart B, Sectioii 51.28, the following information is required for
the deannexation of any residential properties. Must be
completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation). Use as many forms as needed.

Location/Address Z 7/0 D7 '
g i 5/
ParcelIDNumber 0/Snly
o O 000

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the
subject parcel: _l__
2. Description of the residential structures located oil the subject property as listed above:

"rm HWe
FOL

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each structure: i
4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Sex
Age Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

$6,) j

5. Henry County Commission District: L
6. City Council Voting District: /

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, the above listed information and all attached supporting
documents are complete and accurate.

Applicant Signature [WALL Date i Q//
(b M
Procedures\ ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlON$-
Withogut Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY
HEN RY CQUNW DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
4503K: fl-IYYiQiEL

Campaign Disclosrire Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s),
property 0wner(s), agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use
as many forms as

needed.

CHECK ONE: APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER
AGENT ATTORNEY '

OTHER
Has the person described below made, within two
(2) years immediaitely preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts
having in the a value of $250 or more to a member of the
Henry County of Commissioners who will consider the
aggregate
Yes No
B? application?

If Yes, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or the applicant
attorney must the following information
with the Henry County Board of Commissioners within ten representiilig
(10) after this application is first

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of
| Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board MemberName Cam ai n Contribution to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information is true and
correcl, this 1 day

u a
Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name Printed of Applicant/Properly
()wner/Agem/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
day of _/ AIM ,

,, a. n/
'4. 3-029 29 201?
In III'II

"wfOUNTY. 9
i Notary Public (Seal)
"II l

Z:\Planning_20ning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlONS Withoiit Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation

Application, revised
LETTER OF

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not
subject to public heajring requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of
my property frpm the City of Stockbridge for the
following reasons:

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and
complies with requirements established in Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) I prefer to live in Unincorporated
Henry County;
3) I prefer not to live within the
city limits of Stockpridge.
Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of
my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend
County seryices to include the same.

Additional comments:

wins l/u
Signa re

YMM TMMOFLI
Mia/we?
Printed Name Date
amae .re _
ans :{xam

(7W?
.n R O .L a 0 .
1a

5I 3 a .u B.

s s w..1 9 C Y. a a w. F o .L
"m. $35..i=5.. lib! x
is
La
0N
an. .
a o

b..r
:18 no

>u_t-n_a 5 23;:
.93.. .14.m: n:u:E.anan

nmlzlwm

a ... 5 mo

.5: 51.:
:I. 5.:

232:.. :2: 5.1.5.5. 5:.
2.31.55.1.1.5:..3
.5151. as. . 85.5.3!" K 3... :2; :2:
1:: can

26%:8-2ou :55.:uiun

.l z.
2: uzP .

.135: :2. x. .

.3 a . u. u

1.2:.. .2.E

9.7-3.5

u an v. nu 1.. aa

czazo 2059200 ivhf\.:.:
mfg
02.2 53

00

>m2u:\{E

Wz

Q i.\ ~.

5 :. 5:- I

xi .la

73:
El

Elsa.. 1.3.2. can. . : ..
.2. .2. .2. Mn "nu .1 .2. E. i.
.15 ::
an:
0205 :3 22

a- on

Henry County EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING

Meeting Date: Department Requesting Agenda Item:

January 20, 2026 Planning & Zoning

Action Type: Attachments/Exhibits for Agenda Item:

1. Executive Summary
2 Resolution
Adm" t e dby BOG
3. StaffReport
For informational purposes only

Presenter: Toussaint Kirk, Cluster Leader

Agenda Item:

Henry County has received a request for deannexation from the City of Stockbridge to

Unincorporated Henry County for a total of two (2) properties located at 105 Jasper Drive and
220 DeWinter Court consisting of a combined 3.022 +/- acres in Land Lot 25 of the 12th
District. District 2

Applicant: Various Owners Case Number: DE-AX-25-01
Commission District: District 2

Background/Summary:

The owners of the subject property are requesting the 100% deannexation method from the

municipal boundaries of the City of Stockbridge to the unincorporated limits of Henry County

Financial Implications/Considerations: N/A

The project is budgeted. 01'

The project will require the use of Fund Balance. 01'

If yes, please state amount

The project will require no funds.

The project is grant funded and will require a % match
and those funds are/are not budgeted. 01'

Is this request a Capital Project and part of the Capital Project

List?

P:\BOC\BOC Executive Summaries\2026\]anuary 20\DE-AX-25-Ol, Manderley (2 lots), BOC.docx
Additional Comments /Recommendation:

It is Planning & Zoning staffs opinion that the deannexation would not be detrimental to the

health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be deannexed or
to the area remaining within the City of Stockbridge.

P:\BOC\BOC Executive Summaries\2026\January 20\DE-AX-25-01, Manderley (2 lots), 01-20-2026 BOC.docx
De-Annexation Case

#DX-2026-02:
Six Properties in the
Manderley Subdivision

City Council: March 9th, 2026
Cover Letter
from Henry
County Planning
and Zoning
Department on
January 22, 2026
Aerial Photo-Parcels
to De-Annexed

Highlighted in Yellow
Map of 2022
City of
Stockbridge
Annexation
Referendum
with Proposed
De-Annexation
Area
Manderley Subdivision
Zoning Map Excerpt

• Yellow— SR District (Suburban
Residential) — Manderley Subdivision

• Green— PUD District (Planned Unit
Development) — Monarch Village
Subdivision

• Black — Unincorporated Henry
County

• Blue Star — Area of Proposed De-
Annexation
Manderley
Subdivision
Vicinity
Map
Manderley
Subdivision
Parcel Map
Resulting Map
Showing New City
Limits Boundaries
Upon Approval of
DX-2026-02
Legal Requirements for De-Annexation
1. Administrative Requirements:
a. A written, signed application by the owners of no more than ten parcels.
b. Adoption of a signed resolution by the county in which the property is located, consenting to the de-annexation.
c. Submittal of a copy of the application to the municipality.
d. Confirmation by City staff that the procedural requirements for de-annexation have been met by the property
owners.
e. Verification by City staff that the geographic requirements have been met.
f. Approval by the municipality, unless the geographic requirements have not been met.
2. Geographic Requirements:
a. At least one of the parcels must abut/be contiguous to the boundaries of the city limits (not separated from the
city limits by unincorporated areas, a street, a creek or river, or a railroad).
b. No prohibited unincorporated island would be created by the proposed de- annexation.
c. No detrimental effects to the health, safety, and welfare of the property owners of the area to be de-annexed,
or to the area remaining in the municipality (causing the de-annexed area to be cut off from receiving county
services due to the lack of a reasonable access to the de-annexed area).
3. Financial Requirements:
a. The parcels are not located in a municipality that has outstanding general‑obligation bond or revenue‑bond
indebtedness.
Summary of Analysis
1. Administrative Compliance
• Signed de-annexation application submitted to Henry County (six parcels).
• County adopted resolution and transmitted application to the City of Stockbridge.
• Verified use of the 100% method of de-annexation.
• Application meets statutory procedural requirements.
2. Geographic Findings
• Both parcels remain contiguous to City limits before and after de-annexation.
• No unincorporated “island” created.
• City boundary would shift eastward upon approval.
• No impacts to streets, access, or emergency/service vehicle operations.
• No identified health, safety, or welfare concerns.
Summary of Analysis (continued)
3. Financial Considerations
• No outstanding General Obligation (GO) bonds.
• Outstanding revenue bonds through blended component units:
• Urban Redevelopment Agency (City Hall facility).
• Public Facilities Authority (Amphitheater, Cultural Arts Center, public safety facilities).
• Bonds are primarily repaid from City revenues.
• Revenue-backed obligations may be relevant under Georgia de-annexation
statutes.
Financial Considerations: Details
1. Revenue Bonds Supporting City Hall (URA Bonds)
The City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports indicate that the Urban Redevelopment Agency, a blended
component unit, carries long‑term revenue bonds issued for the acquisition, construction, and furnishing of
the City Hall facility. These bonds are expressly stated to be repayable almost entirely from City resources.
• 2023 ACFR: URA revenue bonds outstanding: $8,015,000 as of 12/31/2023
• 2024 ACFR: URA revenue bonds outstanding: $7,160,000 as of 12/31/2024
• Notes to the Financial Statements describe the URA as a blended unit whose debt “is expected to be repaid
almost entirely from the resources of the City.”
2. Revenue Bonds Supporting the Amphitheater / Cultural Arts Center (PFA Bonds)
The Public Facilities Authority (PFA), also a blended component unit, was created to issue bonds for the
construction of the Amphitheater and Cultural Arts Center, among other public facilities. These obligations
likewise rely on repayment from City funding sources.
• ACFR Notes: PFA debt is “expected to be repaid almost entirely from the resources of the City.”
Financial Considerations: Details (continued)
3. Revenue‑Backed Obligations Associated With Police Department‑Related Facilities or Equipment
Both ACFRs show City‑backed debt obligations covering public safety facilities and equipment, including those
funded through the PFA or through City‑wide capital project bonds.
• 2023 ACFR: lists revenue bonds and long‑term liabilities supporting public safety investments.
• 2024 ACFR: debt schedule reflects revenue‑backed financing of City facilities, including public safety
structures and improvements.
4. General Obligation Bonds
Both ACFRs confirm no General Obligation (GO) bonds outstanding for the City of Stockbridge:
• “As of December 31, 2023, the City did not have any general obligation bonded debt outstanding.”
• 2024 ACFR similarly lists no GO debt but identifies substantial revenue bond indebtedness.
Thus, while the City has no GO bonds, it does have revenue bonds whose repayment is structured through City
revenues, including those pledged by blended component units—which may fall under the types of obligations
contemplated in Georgia’s de‑annexation statutes.
Overall Impact
• 8 Phases
• 53 Total Parcels
• Total 3-Year City Tax Revenue: $165,260
• Mix of Confirmed (Phases 1–3) and Calculated (Phases 4–8) totals

Key Takeaway: The cumulative 3-year city tax impact across all phases
totals $165,260, with later phases (4–8) accounting for approximately
68% of the total projected revenue loss.
Confirmed vs. Calculated 3-Year Tax Revenue
by Phase
Confirmed Tax Bill Phases Calculated Phases
• Phase 1 (DX-2024-01): $18,681 (10 • Phase 4 (DX-2024-04): $39,055 (9
parcels) parcels)
• Phase 2 (DX-2024-02): $17,770 (9 • Phase 5 (DX-2024-05): $39,183 (8
parcels) parcels)
• Phase 3 (DX-2024-03): $16,141 (9 • Phase 6 (DX-2024-06): $8,452 (2
parcels) parcels)
• Subtotal (Confirmed): $52,592 • Phase 7 (DX-2024-07): $12,249 (3
parcels)
• Phase 8 (DX-2024-08): $13,729 (3
parcels)
• Subtotal (Calculated): $112,668
Recommendation
Since all of the de-annexation requirements have not been met, the
law states that the Mayor and City Council must disapprove this de-
annexation request (DX-2026-02).

TO: Mayor and City Council

FROM: Ryan C. Anderson, Community Development Director
Brennen Reilly, GIS Analyst/Planner II

CC: Mayor Jayden L. Williams
Shawn Edmonson, City Manager
Valerie Ross, City Zoning Attorney

DATE: March 9th, 2026

SUBJECT: De-Annexation Case #DX-2026-02:
Six Properties in the Manderley Subdivision

Introduction. The owners of six properties within the Manderley Subdivision
submitted a de-annexation application to Henry County Planning & Zoning to request
that their properties be de-annexed from the City of Stockbridge. The Manderley
Subdivision is located at the western edge of the Stockbridge City Limits, bounded by
Walt Stephens Road to the north and Blackall Road to the west. The six properties for
DX-2026-02 have 7.068 +/- total acres in Land Lot 25 of District 12. They comprise
residential lots in the northern portion of the subdivision. Table 1 below provides a list
of the six properties by address, parcel number, and owner/applicant.

Table 1—Properties for Proposed De-Annexation
Property Owner(s) /
Property Address Parcel Number Co-Applicant (s)
330 Kerrith Drive 013A01037000 Darron Maxtion and Ryan Jones
335 Kerrith Drive 013A01026000 Leon Woods
345 Kerrith Drive 013A01027000 Akeem and Lexus Camellia Shotuyo
355 Kerrith Drive 013A01028000 Doris A. Trotter Marshall
365 Kerrith Drive 013A01029000 Lori Nichole Johnson
375 Kerrith Drive 013A01030000 Ann and James Jolley

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900

Henry County Government’s Action. According to a Deannexation Evaluation Report
which was prepared by the Henry County Planning & Zoning Department, Henry County
Government received a de-annexation application from the six applicants electronically
on January 22, 2026. The applicants used the 100% method for the proposed de-
annexation. The Department then prepared a Deannexation Evaluation Report for Henry
County’s Case #DE-AX-25-02, which recommended the approval of the proposed de-
annexation. It stated that the subject property was previously zoned ‘R-1’ (Single-Family
Residential) by Henry County prior to its 2022 annexation into the City of Stockbridge,
and that the property would revert back to R-1 upon the successful de-annexation of the
property from the City back into unincorporated Henry County. The property also had a
previous Henry County future land use designation of Low-Density Residential, which
allowed a density of up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre. After the completion of the DE-AX-
25-02 Evaluation Report, the Henry County Board of Commissioners adopted Henry
County Resolution #26-26, dated January 20, 2026, to approve the de-annexation.

City of Stockbridge’s Receipt of De-Annexation Application Package. The City of
Stockbridge received a copy of the de-annexation application, which was sent
electronically by Henry County on January 22, 2026. There was no cover letter included
in the package, but the Evaluation Report from Henry County Planning and Zoning did list
the included property addresses and parcel numbers.

Background on the Manderley Subdivision. The Manderley Subdivision is
established and well-developed. Table 2 below lists basic facts about it, and the
Appendix contains several pertinent aerial photos and maps.

Table 2—Facts About Manderley Subdivision
Descriptive Factors: Findings:
Current City of Stockbridge Zoning SR (Suburban Residential)
Current City of Stockbridge Future Land Low-Density Residential.
Use Designation
Current Annexation Status Annexed into City via 2022 Referendum.
Estimated Number of Subdivision Lots 79
Number of Subdivision Lots that have 59
been Recently De-Annexed from the City
Name of Subdivider Koppar Corporation.
Number of Development Phases Three.
Years of Recorded Plat Approvals 1983, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1989.*
Status of Subdivision Lots Nearly all are developed with SF homes.
Sizes of Subdivision Lots Approximately one to two acres each.
Years of Home Construction 1985-1997, per Tax Assessors’ records.

*Includes separate sheets for Unit II, and revisions to Unit I & Unit II.

Background on the Surrounding Area. The surrounding area includes Ingle’s Market
and several neighborhood commercial uses flanking Walt Stephens Road; and several
subdivisions to the south, southeast, and east. To the west are several individual

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900

residential parcels outside of Manderley Subdivision, Blackhall Road, the City Limits
Line, and Spivey Lake. The commercial uses are located in the C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) zoning district. The subdivisions to the south, southeast, and east are
located in the PUD (Planned Unit Development) district, while the outlying residential
parcels to the west are zoned ‘SR’ (Suburban Residential). Properties west of Blackhall
Road, in unincorporated Henry County, are zoned ‘R-1’ (Single-Family Residential for
large lots) and ‘RA’ (Residential-Agricultural).

Legal Requirements for De-Annexation. The Official Code of Georgia (O.C.G.A.)
provides legal requirements for de-annexation in O.C.G.A. Sections 36-131 and 36-132.
They are summarized in the list below.
1. Administrative Requirements:
a. A written, signed application by the owners of no more than ten parcels.
b. Adoption of a signed resolution by the county in which the property is located,
consenting to the de-annexation.
c. Submittal of a copy of the application to the municipality.
d. Confirmation by City staff that the procedural requirements for de-annexation
have been met by the property owners.
e. Verification by City staff that the geographic requirements have been met.
f. Approval by the municipality, unless the geographic requirements have not been
met.
2. Geographic Requirements:
a. At least one of the parcels must abut/be contiguous to the boundaries of the city
limits (not separated from the city limits by unincorporated areas, a street, a creek
or river, or a railroad).
b. No prohibited unincorporated island would be created by the proposed de-
annexation.
c. No detrimental effects to the health, safety, and welfare of the property owners of
the area to be de-annexed, or to the area remaining in the municipality (causing
the de-annexed area to be cut off from receiving county services due to the lack
of a reasonable access to the de-annexed area).
3. Financial Requirements:
a. The parcels are not located in a municipality that has outstanding
general‑obligation bond or revenue‑bond indebtedness.

Analysis of De-Annexation Proposal:
1. Administrative Requirements – The applicants for the proposed DX-2026-02 de-
annexation submitted a signed de-annexation application form to Henry County,
which was for six parcels. After the County’s review, it adopted a signed resolution
and sent a copy of the application to the City of Stockbridge. The Planning and
Zoning Staff has verified that the acceptable 100 percent method of de-annexation
has been used, and that the de-annexation proposal meets the geographic
requirements, as are discussed below.
2. Geographic Requirements – From the maps appearing in the Appendix, it is apparent
that all of the six parcels within the proposed de-annexation area abut and are
contiguous to other parcels within the Stockbridge City Limits, and they would even
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
continue to do so if the de-annexation is approved. No prohibited unincorporated
island would be created by the proposed de-annexation. Rather, the de-annexed
area would be surrounded on one side by other parcels remaining within the City
Limits. Whenever a new City Limits Map is prepared, the de-annexed area would
push the city limits further north from the resulting boundary created after the
approval of DX-2026-02. Further, there would be no alteration of the existing streets
or access to them; thus, there do not appear to be any health, safety, or welfare
issues in terms of providing needed transportation of County service vehicles or
emergency vehicles in reaching the homes of the property owners within the de-
annexed area.
3. Financial Requirements – The City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports
(ACFRs) indicate that the Urban Redevelopment Agency, a blended component
unit, carries long-term revenue bonds issued for the acquisition, construction, and
furnishing of the City Hall facility. These bonds are expressly stated to be repayable
almost entirely from City resources. According to the City’s 2023 ACFR, the total
outstanding URA revenue bonds amounted to $8,015,000, and according to the
2024 report, the amount decreased to $7,160,000. Notes to the Financial
Statements describe the URA as a blended unit whose debt “is expected to be
repaid almost entirely from the resources of the City.” Furthermore, the Public
Facilities Authority (PFA), also a blended component unit, was created to issue
bonds for the construction of the Amphitheater and Cultural Arts Center, among
other public facilities. These obligations likewise rely on repayment from City
funding sources, as noted in corresponding ACFRs that note that the PFA is
“expected to be repaid almost entirely from the resources of the City.” Both ACFRs
also show City-backed debt obligations covering public safety facilities and
equipment, including those funded through the PFA or through City-wide capital
project bonds. Namely, the 2023 ACFR lists revenue bonds and long-term liabilities
supporting public safety investments, and the debt schedule of the 2024 ACFR
reflects revenue-backed financing of City facilities, including public safety structures
and improvements. Both ACFRs confirm no General Obligation (GO) bonds
outstanding for the City of Stockbridge. Thus, while the City has no GO bonds, it
does have revenue bonds whose repayment is structured through City revenues,
including those pledged by blended component units—which may fall under the
types of obligations contemplated in Georgia’s de-annexation statutes.

Further considerations regarding the fiscal impact of the proposed de-annexation
supplement the prospective violation of the financial requirements if the de-annexation
were to be approved. Specifically, the fiscal impact of (1) the previous eight de-
annexation phases of the Manderley subdivision from the City of Stockbridge and (2)
the proposed de-annexation of the six properties is analyzed.
1. Fiscal Impact Report: Residential De-Annexations of Manderley Subdivision
(Phases 1–8) –
a. Purpose – This report documents the municipal ad valorem revenue impacts
associated with residential de-annexations approved by the City of Stockbridge
under Phases 1 through 8 (DX-2024-01 through DX-2024-08). The analysis
evaluates City property tax revenue only for tax years 2022, 2023, and 2024,
based on parcel-level data from the Henry County Tax Assessor. The purpose
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
of this report is to provide:
• A transparent fiscal impact analysis for de-annexation decisions
• Parcel-level documentation for Finance review
• A defensible record for Council and audit purposes

b. Methodology –
• Millage Rate Used: 3.77 mills (City of Stockbridge)
• Formula Used:
City Property Tax = Total Assessed Value × 0.00377
• Confirmed Phases (1–3): Actual City tax amounts verified by year
• Calculated Phases (4–8): Assessed values multiplied by the adopted City
millage rate
• Exclusions: County, school district, and special service district taxes
• Rounding: Nearest whole dollar
c. Phase-by-Phase Parcel Breakdown –
i. Phase 1 – DX-2024-01
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills (2022–2024)
Phase Total: $18,681

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
10 Devon Ct 013-A01128005 $597 $613 $652 $1,862
11 Devon Ct 013-A01132000 $571 $593 $620 $1,784
200 Jasper Dr 013-A01051000 $667 $702 $726 $2,095
205 Jasper Dr 013-A01061000 $632 $659 $689 $1,980
215 Jasper Dr 013-A01060000 $541 $597 $613 $1,751
225 Jasper Dr 013-A01059000 $720 $742 $756 $2,218
235 Jasper Dr 013-A01058000 $585 $612 $640 $1,837
245 Jasper Dr 013-A01057000 $552 $581 $610 $1,743
201 Whitesand Bay Dr 013-A01127000 $593 $621 $642 $1,856
211 Whitesand Bay Dr 013-A01138000 $501 $517 $537 $1,555
ii. Phase 2 – DX-2024-02
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills
Phase Total: $17,770

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
160 Jasper Dr 013A01023000 $640 $678 $715 $2,033
165 Jasper Dr 013A01024000 $579 $606 $642 $1,827
195 Jasper Dr 013A01050000 $664 $708 $753 $2,125
310 Kerrith Dr 013A01039000 $754 $803 $843 $2,400
320 Kerrith Dr 013A01038000 $591 $629 $660 $1,880

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
325 Kerrith Dr 013A01025000 $674 $715 $754 $2,143
510 Portloe Ct 013A01049000 $658 $690 $727 $2,075
515 Portloe Ct 013A01047000 $641 $671 $706 $2,018
520 Portloe Ct 013A01048000 $399 $424 $446 $1,269
iii. Phase 3 – DX-2024-03
Status: Confirmed City Tax Bills
Phase Total: $16,141

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
220 Jasper Dr 013A01053000 $666 $704 $741 $2,111
230 Jasper Dr 013A01054000 $687 $720 $754 $2,161
240 Jasper Dr 013A01055000 $678 $705 $743 $2,126
255 Jasper Dr 013A01056000 $646 $685 $721 $2,052
221 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01137000 $629 $666 $706 $2,001
230 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01133000 $625 $655 $693 $1,973
231 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01133000 $621 $654 $691 $1,966
241 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01135000 $710 $735 $769 $2,214
251 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01134000 $626 $658 $681 $1,965
iv. Phase 4 – DX-2024-04
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $39,055

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
115 Jasper Dr 013A01016000 $1,108 $1,344 $1,402 $3,854
145 Jasper Dr 013A01015000 $1,215 $1,479 $1,555 $4,249
150 Jasper Dr 013A01014000 $1,071 $1,307 $1,359 $3,737
340 Kerrith Dr 013A01036000 $1,235 $1,509 $1,584 $4,328
350 Kerrith Dr 013A01035000 $1,224 $1,497 $1,571 $4,292
360 Kerrith Dr 013A01034000 $1,203 $1,469 $1,544 $4,216
370 Kerrith Dr 013A01033000 $1,172 $1,432 $1,505 $4,109
615 Edgecombe Dr 013A01013000 $1,024 $1,251 $1,311 $3,586
625 Edgecombe Dr 013A01012000 $884 $1,324 $1,526 $3,734
v. Phase 5 – DX-2024-05
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $39,183

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
610 Edgecombe Dr 013A01004000 $1,453 $1,572 $1,706 $4,731
620 Edgecombe Dr 013A01005000 $1,354 $1,461 $1,606 $4,421
630 Edgecombe Dr 013A01006000 $1,410 $1,524 $1,678 $4,612
635 Edgecombe Dr 013A01011000 $1,352 $1,460 $1,601 $4,413
640 Edgecombe Dr 013A01007000 $1,394 $1,507 $1,654 $4,555
645 Edgecombe Dr 013A01010000 $1,392 $1,502 $1,653 $4,547

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
650 Edgecombe Dr 013A01008000 $1,357 $1,468 $1,619 $4,444
655 Edgecombe Dr 013A01009000 $1,355 $1,447 $1,557 $4,359

vi. Phase 6 – DX-2024-06
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $8,452

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
110 Jasper Dr 013A01002000 $1,248 $1,565 $1,621 $4,434
120 Jasper Dr 013A01003000 $1,131 $1,416 $1,470 $4,017
vii. Phase 7 – DX-2024-07
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $12,249

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
315 Kerrith Dr 013A01024001 $1,147 $1,425 $1,479 $4,052
170 Jasper Dr 013A01040000 $1,313 $1,648 $1,707 $4,669
175 Jasper Dr 013A01045000 $1,014 $1,255 $1,259 $3,528
viii. Phase 8 – DX-2024-08
Status: Calculated
Phase Total: $13,729

Address Parcel ID 2022 2023 2024 3-Year Total
20 Devon Ct 013A01129000 $1,256 $1,566 $1,623 $4,445
21 Devon Ct 013A01131000 $1,442 $1,802 $1,842 $5,086
200 Whitesand Bay Dr 013A01128000 $1,203 $1,470 $1,525 $4,198

d. Cumulative Fiscal Impact –
• Total Parcels: 53
• Total City Revenue Lost (2022–2024): $165,259.55

e. Conclusion – Residential de-annexations approved under Phases 1 through 8
resulted in an estimated $165,259.55 reduction in City of Stockbridge ad
valorem property tax revenue over the 2022–2024 tax years. This analysis
provides a complete parcel-level accounting of City revenue impacts and is
suitable for Finance review, audit documentation, and Council consideration.

2. Fiscal Impact Report: Proposed De-Annexation of Six Properties from Manderley
Subdivision –
a. Methodology – The fiscal impact of the proposed de-annexation was
evaluated using a per-capita cost-of-service methodology based on the
City’s FY 2026 adopted budget. Because municipal operating and capital
expenditures are not tracked on a parcel-specific basis, per-capita
averages were used to estimate the cost of providing municipal services
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
to the subject properties. The request involves six (6) single-family
residential properties. For fiscal analysis purposes, the properties are
estimated to generate a population of approximately 16 residents, based
on average household size assumptions commonly used for planning
analyses.
i. Total Budget per Capita – The City’s total per-capita expenditure
was calculated using the FY 2026 adopted budget for all funds and
the City’s estimated population.

Total Budget per Capita = Total FY 2026 Adopted Budget ÷
City Population

Using the adopted figures:
• Total FY 2026 Adopted Budget: $74,827,124
• City Population: 36,149
This results in a total per-capita expenditure of approximately
$2,070 per person.

ii. Capital Improvement Budget per Capita – To account for the
capital component of municipal service provision, a per-capita
capital improvement cost was calculated using the City’s FY 2026
capital-related funds, including SPLOST, TSPLOST, and other
capital funds.

Capital Improvement Budget per Capita = FY 2026 Capital
Improvement Budget ÷ City Population

This calculation provides context for the City’s long-term
infrastructure and facility investment obligations associated with
continued service provision.

iii. Average Cost of Municipal Service – The average annual cost of
providing municipal services to the subject properties was
estimated by applying the City’s per-capita cost to the estimated
population associated with the eight properties.

Average Cost of Municipal Service = Total Budget per Capita ×
Estimated Population

Using the estimated value:
• $2,070 per person × 16 residents ≈ $33,120

For fiscal conservatism, and to reflect that not all capital
expenditures scale proportionally to small residential areas, the
estimated annual cost of municipal services attributable to the
subject properties is approximately $25,300.

iv. Property Tax Revenue Loss (Six Properties) – City property tax
revenue was calculated using net taxable values from the 2025
City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
Annual Notices of Assessment and the City’s adopted millage rate.

City Property Tax = (Net Taxable Value ÷ 1,000) × 3.77

This calculation was applied individually to each of the six
properties and then aggregated. Collectively, the properties
generate approximately $3,375 in annual City property tax
revenue.
v. Summary –
• Average Cost of Municipal Services: approximately $25,300
• City Property Tax Revenue: approximately $3,375
• Net Fiscal Impact: Negative

b. Conclusion – Based on the above analysis, the cost of providing
municipal services to the subject properties exceeds the revenue
generated. Thus, the de-annexation will generate a net negative fiscal
impact.

Conclusion. From the preceding analysis, it appears that though both the
administrative requirements and the geographic requirements have been met for the
proposed de-annexation, the financial requirements have not been met., according to
the law, the six applicants are prohibited from de-annexing their properties from the City
of Stockbridge. The City also subsidiarily recognizes the net negative fiscal impact that
the de-annexation will cause to the City’s property tax base.

Recommendation. Since all of the de-annexation requirements have not been met, the
law states that the Mayor and City Council must disapprove this de-annexation request
(DX-2026-02).

RCA/BTR

Appendix

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
10

APPENDIX:

1. Aerial Photo Showing Six Parcels for De-Annexation

2. Map of 2022 City of Stockbridge Annexation Referendum—
Location of Proposed DX-2026-02 De-Annexation Area

3. Manderley Subdivision Zoning Map

4. Manderley Subdivision Vicinity Map

5. Manderley Subdivision Parcel Map

6. Resulting New City Limits Map Upon the Approval of DX-2026-02

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
11

1. AERIAL PHOTO SHOWING SIX PARCELS FOR DE-ANNEXATION

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
12

2. MAP OF 2022 CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
ANNEXATION REFERENDUM:
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DX-2026-02 DE-ANNEXATION AREA
LEGEND:
Pink Striped Areas – Were Already Part of the City of Stockbridge in 2022
Blue Areas – Were Annexed as Part of 2022 City of Stockbridge Annexation Referendum
Blue Waves – Spivey Lake
Yellow Star—Location of Proposed DX-2026-02 De-Annexation

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
13

3. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION ZONING MAP

KEY:
Yellow—SR District (Suburban Residential) — Manderley Subdivision
Green—PUD District (Planned Unit Development) — Monarch Village Subdivision
Black — Unincorporated Henry County
Blue Star — Area of Proposed De-Annexation

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
14

4. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION VICINITY MAP

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
15

5. MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION PARCEL MAP

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
16

6. RESULTING MAP SHOWING NEW CITY LIMITS BOUNDARIES
UPON THE APPROVAL OF DX-2026-02
Yellow Star – De-Annexed Area

City of Stockbridge Community Development; Stockbridge, Georgia (678) 389-7900
Henry County
Department of Planning & Zoning
Toussaint Kirk, Director

January 22, 2026

Stockbridge City Hall
4640 North Henry Blvd
Stockbridge, GA 30281
Attn: Shawn Edmondson, City Manager of the City of Stockbridge

RE: Notification of Deannexation Request - Six Properties into Unincorporated Henry County:

The Henry County Planning & Zoning Department has received an application for the deannexation (DE-
AX-25-02) of six properties located on Kerrith Drive within the Manderley Subdivision, totaling 7.068 +/-
acres in incorporated City of Stockbridge. The properties are as follows:

330 Kerrith Drive, 013A01037000
335 Kerrith Drive, 013A01026000
345 Kerrith Drive, 013A01027000
355 Kerrith Drive, 013A01028000
365 Kerrith Drive, 013A01029000
375 Kerrith Drive, 013A01030000

Enclosed for your review is a copy of the deannexation report prepared by Henry County Planning &
Zoning Staff with application materials, the resolution of acceptance by the Henry County Board of
Commissioners as a result of the January 20, 2026 Board of Commissioners meeting.

Please provide an official letter regarding the City of Stockbridge’s agreement or non-agreement to this
proposed deannexation. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact the
undersigned at 770-288-7526.

Best Regards,

Toussaint Kirk,
Executive Director, Planning and Zoning

Cc: Cheri Hobson-Matthews, County Manager
Kevin Johnson, Deputy County Manager
Rachel Mack, County Attorney
Ryan Anderson, Community Development Director

140 Henry Parkway • McDonough, Georgia 30253
MAIN: (770) 288-7526 • FAX: (770) 288-7550
Enclosures

140 Henry Parkway • McDonough, Georgia 30253
MAIN: (770) 288-7526 • FAX: (770) 288-7550
RESOLUTION #26- 3U)
RESOLUTION
..._ _.._|.....l._l.
ACCEPTING PROPOSED DEANNEXATION
IF-..,_" FROM THE 'CITY OF

Haul-r.
STOCKBRIDGE -| A
PARCEL OF LAND CONSISTING OF
III-fl
OF SIX (6) COMBINED 7.068

ACRES
.._ IN..u_- 1-. GEORGIA
LAND LOT 25 OF THE 12TH DISTRICT, HENRY COUNTY, Id...

Fun n..- to 0. C. G.A.
WHEREAS, pursuant Article 8, the
Henry County
I-l'" Board
-r- of Commissioners
"-;l"-I have

-_-I owners
received application from property .-.- advising Henry County of their intent to deannex

.ar-
(DE-AX-25-02) six (6) properties consisting
.. of a combined total of 7.068 +/- acres in Land Lot 25
-|-|-----I-----'------ ._ ._- u.
.I._ of the

12th District from the municipal boundary
.- fl.l'-II'J'IfI-"'ill-" of the City of Stockbridge, Henry County,
I'l Georgia, being

Properties at 330, 335, 345, 355, 365, 375 Kerrith Drive, Parcels 013A01037000, 013A01026000,
r_|_-|.|.I'\.|.-a.m.nr-I.n.-.Ir.|_-I..I.rI.rI-.r-I.Iu.-.

013A01027000, 013A01027000, 013A01027000, & 013A01030000 (see, Exhibit A,

attached hereto); and

WHEREAS, in -I-
connection lull the
and immediately following,
with, I.
I-'=I I the property
annexation,
'- uln'l '
II'! owners

seek to change the zoning
_ for the Property from the City of Stockbridge
_.........-_I-.r.r.l|.r.-.. SR (Suburban Residential) zoning

district -..| Residence) zoning -
to the Henry County R-l (Single-Family district; and

WHEREAS,
-|- 0.C.G.A. 36-36-131
. .- of Stockbridge
I the City
grants
the authority
-.I to deannex
-.|. an

.-. or .
area areas of the existing corporate limits upon the
_n. nu. adoption
. of a resolution by the governing authority

of .._.._|...__._l..r
the county in which such property is located consenting
.... to such deannexation; and

WHEREAS, Henry County Board of Commissioners analyzed
1--.- rI-I-II and whether
r -.|-the deannexation
rel-'- may

I- detrimental
be .J---- III-
to the health, safety, 'J-u of
and welfare
II - '- residents and
the '-- II u'u' Inl'
property
- owners of the
Jh-- be
ul-
area to

deannexed
ITIFI or to the
-IFarea remaining within the municipality; and

WHEREAS,
III the Henry
I County
I. of Commissioners
Board u has determined thatII
the proposed

deannexation
u - of I
the Property into
I. material
the County would not cause aII I increase in the 'dn'fl
ll burden on Henry

County; and

WHEREAS,
f the
Henry County
'I Board
' of Commissioners has determined that
'I the proposed'

would not result in an increase in density and infrastructure
deannexation of the
f.l-'- 'uI-II'I-Property into
I the County
-|-'l F- I'u' .'I-' I

P:\Annexations & u -I:-
Resolutiondocx
demands which would be detrimental to Henry County and to the health, safety, and welfare of Henry

County and its citizens; and

WHEREAS, the Henry County Board of Commissioners has determined that the proposed

deannexation would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property

owners of the area to be deannexed or to the area remaining within the municipality.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of 0. C. GA. 3 6-3 6-

131, et seq, Henry County accepts the proposed deannexation (DE-AX-25-02) of the Property, as described

in Exhibit A, from the municipal boundaries of the City of Stockbridge to the corporate boundary of Henry

County, Georgia, on the grounds that the proposed the proposed deannexation would not be detrimental to

the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be deannexed or to the

area remaining within the municipality.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Manager and/or the County Attorney are

authorized and directed to send such notice(s) as are required by law to the City of Stockbridge and/or the

effected property owners.

BE IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Attorney is authorized to initiate such legal

proceedings as are proper to enjoin the deannexation of the Property and/or initiate and/or engage in the

arbitration proceedings authorized per 0. C. G.A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall be forwarded to the City, together with

such supporting documentation as are reasonable and necessary to support the same.

P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbridge\2025\DE-AX-25-02\Staff Items\DE-AX-25-02 Resolutiondocx
BE IT SO RESOLVED THIS 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

OF HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA

Carlotta Harrell, Chair

ATTEST

Stephanie Braun, County Clerk

P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbridge\2025\DE-AX-25-02\Staff Items\DE-AX-25-02 Resolutiondocx
Deannexation Evaluation Repart

Henry County Planning & Zoning CITY OF STOCKBRIDGE
DE-AX-25-02

Commission District: 2
Commissioner: Neat Robinson

Report Prepared by: Kenta Lanham, Planner III

Property Owners: Darron Maxtion and Ryan Jones
Leon Woods
Akeem and Lexus Camellia Shotuyo
Doris A. Trotter Marshall
Lori Nichole Johnson
Ann and James Jolley

Location: 330 Kerrith Drive
335 Kerrith Drive
345 Kerrith Drive
355 Kerrith Drive
365 Kerrith Drive
375 Kerrith Drive

Parcel ID(s): 013A01037000
013A01026000
013A01027000
013A01027000
013A01027000
013A01030000

Request: Deannexation

BOC Meeting: January 20, 2026

Lot Size: 7.068 +/- acres (total)

Zoning History: A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from to RM-75

(RZ-66-12) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
denied by the Henry County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues on

January 3, 1967.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 to RM-85

(RZ-67-01) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
withdrawn by the applicant on February 7, 1967, before consideration by the Henry

County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 to RA-lOO
(RZ-67-02) which included the subject property as part of a larger property was
approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners of Roads and Revenues
on March 7, 1967.

P:\Annexations & Items\DE-AX-25-02, Manderley (6 lots), 1-20-2026 BOC.docx
A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 and RA-
100 to C-2 (RZ-71-07) which included the subject property as part of a larger

property was approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners on August
30, 1971.

A review of zoning indicates that a rezoning request from RA-200 to RA-
150A* (RZ-82-08) which included the subject property as part of a larger property
was approved by the Henry County Board of Commissioners on October 5, 1982.

With the adoption of the ULDC in 2009, those properties zoned RA-150 or RA with one (1)
lots were rezoned to R-l (Single-Family Residence). As such, the current zoning of the
acre

Manderley subdivision is now R-l.

Previous to annexation by the City of Stockbridge, the properties were zoned R-1

(Single-Family Residence) as illustrated on the Henry County Zoning
Map. which was adopted on November 19, 2013, by the Henry County Board of
Commissioners.

The subject properties were annexed by the City of Stockbridge on January 1,
2023, per Georgia Senate Bill 612 (2021-2022).

Per thezoning map featured on the website and zoning correspondence
received by Planning staff on October 19, 2023, from City of Stockbridge
Community Development Department staff, the subject properties are zoned SR
(Suburban Residential).

Adjacent properties are as follows:

North: City of Stockbridge
South: Unincorporated Henry County
East: City of Stockbridge and Unincorporated Henry County
West: City of Stockbridge

Current Land Use: Single-Family Residences

Future Land Use: The City of Stockbridge 2024 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property
as Low Density Residential (up to 1-4 units per acre). Previous to annexation by

the City of Stockbridge, the properties had a FLUM designation of Low Density
Residential (up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre, net).

Proposed Zoning: As per the application materials, the residents of six (6) properties, consisting of a
combined total of 7.068 +/- acres, within the Manderley subdivision propose to
deannex the subject properties from the municipal boundaries of the City of
Stockbridge to the unincorporated limits of Henry County. Upon deannexation, the
properties would be zoned R-1 (Single-Farnily Residence), which is the previous
zoning designation of the properties previous to annexation by the City of
Stockbridge.

Comments: The owners of the subject property are requesting the 100% deannexation method
into the City of Stockbridge. According to the Code Georgia Annotated,
0. C. GA 36-36-131, municipal corporations can deannex incorporated area or
areas which directly abut the existing municipal boundary or would directly abut
on the municipal boundary if it were not otherwise separated from the municipal

boundary by lands owned by the municipal corporation or some other political
P:\Annexations & Deannexations\Deannexations\Stockbr-idge\2025\DE-AX-25-02\Staff Manderley (6 lots), 1-20-2026 BOC.docx
Henry County Planning and Zoning City ofStockbridge (DE-AX-25-02)
BOC Meeting: January 20, 2026 Page 3

subdivision, by lands owned by this state, or by the width of any street or
street right of way; any creek or river; or any right of way of a railroad or other
public service corporation.

The application packet, including the written and signed applications of all of the
owners of all of the land proposed to be deannexed, and containing a complete

description of the lands to be deannexed was submitted to Henry County via
application portal SagesGov on December 29, 2025, in accordance with 0.C.G.A.
36-36-113.

As per the application materials, the residents of six (6) properties, consisting of a
combined 7.068 +/-acres, within the Manderley subdivision propose to deannex
the subject properties from the municipal boundaries of the City of Stockbridge to
the unincorporated limits of Henry County. Upon deannexation, the properties
would be zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residence), which is the previous designation
of the properties previous to annexation by the City of Stockbridge.

The City of Stockbridge 2024 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property
as Low Density Residential (up to 1-4 units per acre). Previous to annexation by
the City of Stockbridge, the properties had a FLUM designation of Low Density
Residential (up to 2.0 dwelling units per acre, net).

The Future Map (FLUM), as part of the Henry County 2045
Land Use

Comprehensive Plan, designation of the surrounding unincorporated Henry

County properties is Medium Density Residential, which is described in the
Comprehensive Plan as areas consisting of single family homes on a single lot.
New development in these areas should provide pedestrian facilities, including
sidewalks and crosswalks, and have an appropriate streetscape. Walkable

neighborhoods should be created with appropriate parks and open space. The
Medium Density Residential FLUM designation supports developments with a
density of up to 4.0 dwelling units per acre, net.

The subject property is located within an area designated as a Suburban Mix on
the Henry County Development and Infrastructure Strategy Area Map. The vision
for Suburban Mix areas is to accommodate a variety of types of residential
neighborhoods that are predominantly single family, as well as some supporting
areas of retail (shopping) and workplaces. A system of multi-use trails supports
both transportation and recreational goals with sidewalks prioritized around
schools, parks, and designed community centers.

Per 0. C. G.A. 36-36-134, in the event of a deannexation, a municipality may, but
is not required to, continue to provide any services to the property which it was

providing immediately prior to the deannexation, provided that the county and
municipality have agreed to terms and conditions for the municipality continuing
to provide such services.

Per 0. C. GA. 36-36-13], a municipality is granted the authority to deannex an area
or areas of the existing corporate limits upon the adoption of a resolution by the

governing authority of the county in which such property is located consenting to
such deannexation. If the governing authority of the county consents to the
deannexation and the deannexation conforms with the requirements of 0. C. G.A.
Article 8, the governing authority of the municipal corporation shall approve such
deannexation unless it that the deannexation would be detrimental to the

P:\Annexations & Manderley (6 lots), BOC.docx
Henry County Planning and Zoning City ofStockbridge (DE-AX-25-02)
BOC Meeting: January 20, 2026 Page 4

health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be
deannexed or to the area remaining within the municipality.

Recommendation: It is Planning & Zoning opinion that the deannexation would not be
detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners
of the area to be deannexed or to the area remaining within the City of Stockbridge.
Attachments:
0 RZ-82-08 October 5, 1982, Board of Commissioner meeting minutes
0 Exhibit Maps
Application Packet

P:\Annexations & Manderley (6 lots), 1-20-2026 BOC.docx
149

STATE OF GEORGIA

COUNTY OF HENRY

October 5, l982

The regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Henry County was held
in the Administration Building on October 5, I982 at 9:35 a.m.

Those present were:

Edward H. Whiddon, Sr., Chairman, presiding
William M. Gardner, Vice Chairman
James R. Brannan, Commissioner
W. D. Patrick, COmmissioner
Marion Hall Simpson, Commissioner

Ron County Administrator; Philip Keen, County Attorney; Beverly McLeod,
Rabun,
Clerk; Shedd, Zoning Administrator; Sherri DeCinque, Henry Herald; Pat Murdock,
Tom

Henry Neighbor; Robert Clough, WZAL; Lewis Hurd; Mac Irvin; Phil Kelley; and
several visitors.

The Reverend Lindsey Smith, Associate Pastor of Bear Creek Baptist Church,
gave the invocation and the Chairman led in the pledge to the flag.

The Chairman explained to those present that the County Administrator would
open the bids at this time and that the bids would be awarded later during the
meeting after tabulation was complete.

Officer Dunlap, a Deputy Jailer, was presented with a Letter of
James L.
Commendation bravery exercised by him on September ll, l982 when he rescued
for the

jail inmates during a fire. The Chairman expressed his appreciation to Officer

Dunlap and Sheriff Chaffin who also was present.

Mr. Charles Dailey Mill Road spoke to the Board regarding damage
Shaw of
that had been done road by garbage trucks.
to the Commissioner Patrick stated
that he and Road Superintendent Dickey would go to the road and investigate the
matter. Mr. Shaw expressed his thanks.

Mr. Robert Whitaker of Camp Fortson came before the Board to present a deed

copy of a previously unnamed road (currently know as Russell Road). He wanted to

verify that the road was a county read. The Chairman stated that if Mr. Whitaker
could provide the County Attorney_with a photostat of the I903 deed that the
matter would be investigated.

Mr. Lewis Hurd, who was representing J. Evans (a deveIOper), presented

copies of plats to the Board to assist them in reviewing Mr. Evans' rezoning
request change from C-2 and RM-75 to on Highway 351, LL 22 s A} of the 6th
district. Change was requested for the future development of Windhaven Plantation
Subdivision and the Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Hurd explained that

since part of the property was zoned'C-Z and part RM-75, the desire was to zone
both landlots residential. Commissioner Brannan made the motiOn to approve this

rezoning request and Commissioner Patrick seconded. Motion passed with unanimous
approval.

A preliminary plat approval for J. P. Evans, Windhaven Planation, Unit Two,
was granted on a motion made by Commissioner Simpson with the stipulation that it
pass soil and erosion and road specs. Commissioner Patrick seconded and motion

passed unanimously.

The Zoning Administrator presented a rezOning request change of Zack's

Properties from C-l to C-4 on the corner of Hwy. l38 and Hwy. l55 for a convenience
store (Nite 0wl#l3). C-4 was requested since Zack's Properties would like to sell
beer and wine at the proposed location, LL I33 of the llth district. The Planning
Board recommended approval. Since a store had previously been at that location,
150

Page two

October 5, l982

Commissioner inquired of the Zoning Administrator if this request would be
Brannan

grandfathered. Zoning Administrator stated that the grandfather clause does
The
not apply when there is a change of tenant, a considerable amount of expansion,
or a change in use, Section 8-6, Page 68, of the Zoning Manual. Mr. Wayne Staples,
Mrs. Davidson, Mrs. Crumbley, and Mrs. Louise Fitzgerald, concerned citizens who
were present, opposed the request, stating that this was a dangerous intersection,
believed the store would increase the number of DUls on the Road if it sells beer
and wine, and do not want the added litter that could possibly result.
Commissioner Patrick inquired about the lot size and Zack Hinton informed the
Board that the lot was approximately 270' x 270', the lot has been recurbed with

underground drainage, there will be an access lane coming off of Hwy. l38 and 155,
and that the request has been approved by State D.0.T. Commissioner Tom Moreland
and the State Fire Marshall. Stating that since it was already zoned C-l, the

Vice Chairman made a motion to rezone the lot Commissioner Patrick seconded
and motion passed by quorem with Commissioners Brannan and Simpson opposing.

At this time, the Zoning Administrator presented a beer and wine application
for Nite Owl #l3 for
Board's approval. He advised the Board that the manager's
the
check from the Police Department had not been received. Commissioner Patrick
made the motion to table the request until 9:30 a.m., October l9, l982.
Commissioner Simpson seconded and all were in favor.

Mr. Richard Chatham of Koppar Corporation presented a rezoning request
change from RA-ZOO to R-lSOA in LL 7, 8, and 26 of the 12th district (former
"Lion Country property). The Planning Board had approved the request

subject proper letter from the Water Authority; and also approved a vari-
to the
ance required 30' sidelines.
of the Mr. Chatham explained to the Commissioners
4 x

that the Planning Board had not approved the request two years ago; subsequently,
his corporation had upgraded the subdivision project which would include a

community center, beach, pool, clubhouse, and tennis court with one-acre lots.
Mr. Chatham stated that the R-lSOA zoning was requested because of needed flexi-

bility to shift the houses if necessary and maintain the land mass and that his
corporation would be willing to work with any restrictive covenants that the
Board required. Commissioner Simpson inquired about the flood way of the Lake
Spivey dam located inthe area and stated that in the final approval, he would not
vote for the project if the flood way is not indicated on the preliminary plat.
Mr. Chatham stated that he was in receipt of a letter from the State indicating
that the dam was safe. Commissioner Brannan made a motion to approve the rezon-

ing request and the Vice Chairman seconded. All were in favor.

A preliminary plat approval of Unit l (66.92 acres) for the above project was
presented. Commissioner Brennan made the motion to approve the preliminary plat
subject to a soil and erosion plan, passing of restrictive covenants, approved

by the Board of Commissioners, and an indication of how the community property
(community center, beach, pool, etc.) will be divided. The Vice Chairman second~
ed and motion passed unanimously.

E. Kordet, who was present, presented a conditional use request for
Robert
additional greenhouses at LL 73 of the 8th district, containing 5.16 acres located
on River Road. The Planning Board had approved the conditional use subject to
a) a one-year review, b) shrubs be planted and all landscaping of property to be
properly done prior to any building permits for requested additional greenhouses,
and c) that Kordet build only three greenhouses in 1983 and three greenhouses in
l984. The Zoning Administrator explained to the Board that the above stipulations
were placed on this request due to the public input obtained at the Planning
Board's meeting. The Vice Chairman made the motion to approve the conditional
use subject to the same aforementioned stipulations. Commissioner Brannan
seconded and all were in favor.

Mike before the Board to present a rezoning request change from
Clanton
came

M-l to C-h for
body repair shop at LL lSS of the 7th district located on the

corner of Highway Barn Road and Hwy. 42 (formerly known as Holbrook Machinery,
lnc.). The Planning Board had recommended approval with appropriate screening of
the fenced areas. Commissioner Patrick made the motion to approve the rezoning

request change to C-4 with appropriate screening installed and the Vice Chairman
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
151

Page three

October 5, l982

Mr. Ralph Keenan, who was present, requested a variance to convert single

family dwelling into a duplex in LL l59 of the 7th district located on Weeping
Willow Lane. Planning Board had denied on the basis that it was spot zoning.
Mr. Ralph Painter, the adjacent landowner to the property in question, opposed
the request since he feared a constant turnover of residents if duplexes were
allowed. In view of the fact that this would possibly set a precedent for future

requests, Commissioner Brannan made a motion to deny the request. Commissioner
Patrick seconded and motion passed by quorem with the Vice Chairman and Commissioner
Simpson opposing.

Zoning Administrator presented a conditional exception for Richard's
The
Paint Body Shop to have an impound lot in LL 135 of the 7th district located
and
on Highway Bl East. The property is currently zoned R-BS and is classified as a
non-conforming use, but is allowed to operate as a non-conforming use under
provisions. The Planning Board had earlier denied due to the fact
that the impound lot would not be in the proper location. Mr. Richard Reece was

present to answer questions. The Vice Chairman made the motion to table the

request and Commissioner Patrick seconded. Motion passed by quorem with Commis-
sioner Simpson opposing. The Chairman advised the public that the new zoning
manual does not have a classification for an impound lot and that the Board will
resolve the issue in the near future.

Senator Janice Horton requested that the Board proclaim October l7-23, 1982,
as Business Women's The proclamation was presented to the Board
by Mrs. Hazel Gardner and the Vice Chairman read to those present. Commissioner
Brannan made the motion to adopt the resolution affecting the request and
Commissioner Simpson sec0nded. Motion passed unanimously.

Ken Belcher Garage requested a conditional exception for a storage
of Ken's
lot in LL 33 of the Henry Blvd., at Highland Village.
l2th district
on N. PrOperiy
is presently zoned C-l. The Planning Board denied since the Board decided it was
not the best use for the property. Commissioner Simpson, however, made the
motion to approve the request with an automatic one-year review and for the lot
not be used for an impound lot. Commissioner Patrick seconded and all were in
favor.

Mr. Clarence Powell Wrecker and Huskey Wrecker Services spoke
of Powell's
to the Board impound lot for the county and regarding l8h3 East
regarding an

Atlanta Road where he had been operating a business under a non-conforming use.
His attorney, Mr. Tankersly, requested the Board to inform Mr. Powell of the
conditions that he should meet before he can obtain a county license.
Commissioner Simpson made the motion to authorize Zoning Administrator to
the

gather information for the Board's review of this matter. The Zoning Administra-
tor stated permit would be issued to Mr. Powell when certain questions
that a

could be cleared up. Representatives from Wanda's Wrecker Service and another
company were also present to support the request for county designated impound
lots.

A one-year review was conducted on a conditional use for A. C. Aukerman for
a mobile home for a night watchman for his business in Hampton. Property
presently zoned M-l and is LL l66 of the 6th district, located at 595 N. Steel

Drive, Hampton, Planning Board recommended approval to continue one year.
The Vice Chairman made the motion to grant the conditional use and Commissioner
Brannan seconded. Motion passed by quorem with Commissioner Simpson opposing.

Ron County Administrator, presented an employment contract for
Rabun,
Sharon Williams of Cobb County, to be employed as a temporary part-time computer
operator in the Commissioners' Office at a rate of SIG/hour beginning October 9,
1982 and ending November l9, I982. Commissioner Brannan made the motion to
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract and the Vice Chairman seconded.
Motion passed unanimously.

The purchase of the following used equipment was read into the minutes:
15?.

Page four

October 5, 1982

a. Used fire vehicles:
SERIAL DATE OF
MODEL 8 MAKE NUMBERS COST PURCHASE

Two (2) 1968 Pierch Fire Trucks CO0LUF30438 $ 7.750 10/4/32
on a Ford chassis, 1,000 gal. 7.750 10/9/82
pumper, 500 gal. water tank,
l76-inch wheel base, gasoline
engine, air brakes, 5 speed trans-
mission

On a motion made by Commissioner Brannan, the minutes for September 7, 20,
21, and 24, 1982 were approved, subject to one correction. The Vice Chairman
seconded and all were in favor.

On amade by Commissioner Simpson and seconded by Commissioner
motion

Brannan, following budget amendment was approved.
the Budget Amendment No. A
which transfers $735 from Sheriff-Office Equipment to Jail-Office Equipment (to
purchase AIR PAK for Jail). All were in favor.

Two Water and Sewer presented for the Board's
Authority contracts were

approval. Contract No. 16, Indian Creek Water
Supply Project, Dam, Spillway,
and Access Roads. Contract No. 17, Indian Creek Water Supply Project, Raw Water

Pump Station, and Raw Water Main. The County Attorney advised the Board that
the contracts appear to be in order. Commissioner Brannan made the motion to

allow the Chairman to sign both contracts and Commissioner Patrick seconded.
Motion passed by quorem with Commissioner Simpson opposing on the grounds that
he would not approve if it in any way restricted public access onto the public
property of the proposed new reservoir.

At this County Administrator declared for those present the bids
time, the
for a new Pumper Truck for the Fire Department.
1250 GPM Two Stage Centrifugal
They were: Harless, low bid, at $137,783 with a finance rate of 10.99%, Maxim
from Vitco Fire and Safety with no financing provided, American La France at
$155,h50 at 9.25%, and FMC at $160,59h at 8.5%. Mr. J. R. Roberts of Harless

was present and explained to the Board that if Harless is awarded the bid, the
interest rate would not accrue until approximately April, 1983 when the truck is
delivered and accepted by the Fire Chief, and the first 20% downpayment would not
be due until July, 1983. He also stated that the quoted interest rate would be
firm. Mr. Roberts advised that the truck has a 2h-foot ladder and that the
Insurance Services Office (ISO) no longer sets a 15-year limit as long as the

pumper can perform at the required rate. Commissioner Brannan made the motion
to table the bids and Commissioner Patrick seconded. All were in favor.

On a motion made by Commissioner Brennan and seconded by Commissioner
Patrick, the meeting was recessed for lunch at 1:00 p.m. Motion passed unani-
mously.

The meeting came back into session at 1:95 p.m. Those present were all

Commissioners, Ron Rabun, Philip Keen, Beverly McLeod, Tom Shedd, Chief of
Police Elkins, and several visitors.

As five beer and wine violation hearings had been scheduled for this time,
the Chairman stated that the Board would hear all the evidence in all cases and
then pass judgment at the end if there were objections;
no Attorneys Richard
Mylam and A. J. Welch stated they had no objections. The pertinent facts are
listed below with each violation.

Brannan's Gas and Oil had its license suspended 21 September 1982 on an alleged
sell of beer to a minor by a Mr. Horace Paul Brannan. Location of store is
I-75 and SR 351 and date of alleged offense was September 17, 1982 at 7:15 p.m.
Detective Tony Seiph was sworn in and advised that he, Detective Sgt. Hill, and
a 17-year old black juvenile, Johnny Glover, Jr. went to the location.

Johnny Glover, Jr. was sent into the store with a marked $5 bill, Serial #
F9363316IB, and came out with a sack which contained a six-pack of Schlitz malt
153

Page five

October 5, I982

liquor. The stated $5 bill was recovered from the cash register and Glover,
according to Detective Selph, identified Horace P. Brannan as the one who sold
him the beer. According to testimony, no ID had been solicited. A. L. Brannan, Sr.

stated that Glover did not positively identify Horace Brannan as the seller, that
he felt he had been and that the Police Department working against

Detective Glen Kettering was sworn in to give testimony on Lil- General Store who
had its license suspended on September 24, I982 for allegedly selling to a minor
on September 3, l982 at l0:00 p.m. DetectiVe Kettering said he responded to a
call that three juveniles had been observed buying beer, i.e., Joseph Bastarache,
l2 years old, Jeffery Abernathy, l6 years old, and Daniel Peake, l5. Detective

Kettering advised that upon questioning Kimberly L. Phelps she did admit to
selling the beer. William E. Holliway, Division Manager of those stores in
Georgia and owner of license, asked Mrs. Debbie Georgie and Mrs. Jerry Rogers,
employees of the store who were present, to verify the allegation that
Detective Kettering had stated that Miss Phelps is fired, you will lose your

Attorney A. J. Welch, who was Highway 8] Package
representing Thomas A. Nash of

Store, asked that the witnessses inThey were:
this case be identified.
Detective Selph, Detective Sgt. Hill, Johnny Glover, Jr. The alleged violation
occurred on or about 6:00 p.m., September l7, l982 and license was suspended
September 2], I982. Detective Selph stated that this store was a spot check,
that Glover was sent in with a $5 bill, Serial #93633l6lD, and did buy a l-quart
bottle of Schlitz malt liquor. Glover identified Eugene Tschudy as the seller
of the beer. Mr. Nash, owner of the license, was sworn in and answered several

questions.

Detective Selph was again sworn in to give testimony on al alleged violation of
selling beer to a minor at Red Ace Fuel Stop on Jonesboro Road at 1-75.
Detective Selph stated that Glover was sent in with a $l0 bill, Serial F29GOZIISB;
and returned with a six-pack of Schlitz malt liquor. Selph also stated that this
was a spot check with no previous complaints. According to Detective Selph,
Glover identified Nancy L. Howard as the seller of the beer, however, the $l0
bill was not recovered. Detective Hill was sworn in at approximately 3:l0 p.m.
Glover was sworn in and stated that he had purchased beer and not

Schlitz beer.

At this point, the Board by unanimous vote, recessed at 3:30 p.m. and reconvened
at 3:h0 p.m. to continue discussion of the alleged violations at the Red Ace

(Delta) Fuel Stop. Paul A. Melton, manager of Red Ace, was sworn in and stated
that he instructs his selling beer to minors and/or on holidays,
employees on the
that he had hired Ms. Howard, and that she was paid an hourly wage and did not
receive a sales commission. John W. Williams, owner of the license, was sworn in
and stated that their corporation does not condone selling to minors since they
believe it to be morally wrong and is not good business.

Detective Tony Selph was sworn in to testify for an alleged selling of beer to a
minor by Lonnie 0. Thurman at Love's Package Store, Hwy. I38 and #2 South, on or
about 7:50 p.m., September l7, I932. License was suspended September 2l, l932.
Detective Selph stated that Glover, Jr. was again sent into the store with a $5
bill, Serial #9363316l8, and came back to the car with a of Schlitz malt

liquor. Selph stated that Thurman had stated to him that he had sold
Detective
Glover the $5 bill was recovered from Love's cash register, and the
beer, and
Police Department had responded to this store due to complaints.

After hearing from each of the attorneys for the license holders, a motion was
made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Patrick to adjourn into executive session
to deliberate their findings.

The Board returned approximately 25 minutes later and issued their findings.
154

Page six

October 5, l982

After some initial discussion and comments, a motion was made by Mr. Gardner and
seconded by Mr. Patrick to suspend the licenses of all violators for a period of

30 days retroactive to the date of the
original suspension. Commissioners

Whiddon, Gardner, and Patrick voted for and Simpson and Brannan against.

Mr. Rabun, County Administrator, presented bids on various items at this
time.

Antifreeze: Interstate Ford.Sales $l,58l.l0
Downey Auto Store l,l85.00
Mercer Truck & Tractor l,l6l.50
C 8 H lnterprises l,lh5.00
Parker Brothers l,098.00
Beaudry Ford l,083.50

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner to accept the bid of $1,098 from Parker Brothers,
their being a local vendor. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brannan. All were in
favor with Mr. Simpson abstaining.

Gasoline: Ward Oil Company $l.0|65 per gallon
II
May 8 Carter Oil Co. l.0thS
Anderson Oil Company i.003l25
Jones Petroleum 9975

This is an average gallon for the four types of fuel for which bids
price per
were solicited. Motionby Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Patrick to
was made
award the bid to Jones Petroleum Company at an average price per gallon of
$.997S. Motion passed unanimously.

Uniforms
Police Dept. Burdon Uniform Company $18,759.h0
Martins' Service Uniforms l6,236.72

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Brannan to accept the low bid
of $16,236.72 from Martin's Service Uniforms. All were in favor.

Uniforms
Sheriff's
Dept. Banner Uniform Company 5 7,676.25
Burdon Uniform Company 6,360.00
MartinsI Service Uniforms 5,327.50

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson to accept the low bid
of $5,827.50 from Martins' Service Uniforms. The vote was unanimous.

Two mobile
radios Motorola $ 2,986.00
Custom Installation 2,924.00

Motion was made by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson to award the bid to

Custom Installation. All were in favor.

Two walkie
talkies Custom Installation $ l,880.00
Motorola l,696.00

Motion was made by Mr. Brennan and seconded by Mr. Gardner to accept the low bid
of $1,696.00 from Motorola. The vote was unanimous.

Upon motion by Mr. Gardner and seconded by Mr. Simpson, the meeting adjourned
at 6:l5 p.m.
155

Page seven

October 5, 1982

{4&1 f

Edward H Whiddon, Sr., Chairman

24% A
William M. Gardner, Vice Chairman

as R. Brennan, Commissioner

W. D. Patrick, (C 'ss oner
1/7

Marion Hall Simpson, C ssi er

.muEaEm .25 .EwEsucv

wan a; Nonmwaxgurmo 1%; awE .32

23525359 a

m2. .

EoEnEm .>_co .EmEsou

he

ucu od UUBEEEEE

awE
.amo.

oszON ma Nu mm E mu oz 2a 5

ER RD

mm: .woEaEm 2:0 .EwEsov

enema; 9.5..
ECU zum w :20: mo:
320. mos. mm Om. . HS U> EU

auE
5353.32 .32

go:
I IIIDII DIIII D

ER RD

COUNTY
HENRY
GOVE

mment

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY
COUNTY. GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR
DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY
COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOT ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. THERE ARE NO
EXCEPTIONS.

A MEETING ISADVISED, BUT NOT
REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
WILL ONLY CONDUCT
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY,
WEDNESDAY, AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
VISIT
TO SCHEDULE A
MEETING ONLINE.

NO PRE-APPLICA TION MEE TING WILL BE
CONDUCTED WITHOUTAN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER
ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 288-75326.

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY
RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

140 HENRY PARKWAY

MCDONOUGH, GEORGIA 30253
\; HENRY COUNTY

counw DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Gavernrrwni -~

Deannexation A Iication Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE :ACCEPTED -
NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED COPEES PROCEDURE STAFF INIT1A.}...
ITEMS

Pre-Application Must be obtained from a current planner, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your
application. (OPTIONAL)
Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of Attorney".

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attorney will be
contacted with regards request Only owners and those listed as
to a

applicant or agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners fried with an application and must be
notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be notarized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent.

Residential Required for any deanexation request which includes any residential
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property owner(s) name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

As-buiit Survey Must be prepared and sealed last years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or land surveyor registered in the State of
(1 l x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines;,3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or square footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
setbacks, road correct scale, north arrow, and present zoning

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the; Planning and Zoning Department
Director

Z:\Planning_Zoning\0Ffice Forms\Zoning ApplicatiomAPPUCATIONS --
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
Ill \R W (I 'GAl

H "V ,

\l'l'l IQ \\\l\\|ll)\

PC

WMWLN

III

Fm DH mm Utocusn x Imunmmuc I

330 Max:724 1):: as,
'H )1 HI 2 $7,122 u A 0

MD) \ 18H! 13301037000 LONl\(: DISTRK 5
I \| w \m I RH]! IR n ll

427/ 7
UAW

.RT\ SH 55 \ '6" \ ;-u\ I: .u
u. 1 u . 3d". "- RUM

\(H -\L

use uni):

90!!) 'i l}
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A notary public or other completing this
only the identity of the individual
who signed the document to which this certificate is
attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy. or
validity of that document.
State of California
Los Angeles
County 0f )

On Iii/[M '15 before me,
Jesse Wang, Notary Public

(insert name and title of the officer)

personally appeared M AHC'fl 0 at

who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person( whose nameqir)
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helspie ey executed the same in

person(
r authorized

or the
capacity{i ,
and that by
entity upon be alf of which the
signature}; on the instrument the

acted. executed the instrument.

personys')
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
cccccc
:ouvuuuu uuuuuuuuuuu lat-note ooooooooooo

JESSE WANG
WITNESS my hand and

seal.
: i Comm. tr 2518066
E Las Angeles County
California Notary Public

. Comm. Expires MAV19.2029 E
eeeeeee u ooooooooooo
onnon-ouuoauuuno-and

Signature (Seal)

Dram/$71M
/J:.l7 {iii-NR
{1' w ""PLANNING
h [.1 (N3
\ [V 8:

unm mmm

Campaign Disclosure Farm
and/or warms-m. list as m 3 n y fnrmuu
rmWW. mmpimd in AU. pmpem mums}, menus!
newt-ii.

AGENT Ar mum
Purwmnrmngn
('ntamm: M Mmr'zM

the g oi Ihis applicatm campaign
iau an: person made. within hm (2) wars immediately preceding
is value 525" nr more In a member
mtrihminns aggmganng $250 or more made gifts having in the aggregate

Hem) Board of Commissioners who will consider lhc application?

Yes No

must the foiiou-ing information
the appiirmnnrpmpcny aunt-neg representing the applicant
war}: the Henry C oumy Board of'Commissinncrs within ten ( 10) days this application is

Description 5350 or gmter given
Commissionermnning Advisory Dollar amount of
Cam ii Contribution lo Baird Member
Board Mamba Name 1:

We mm the foregoing information is true and correct. this day of

44, Max
f2 //
Name -
Printed Signature 5 OuuerlAgenL'Other

Strum to and subscribed before me this day of

Nam} Publig
2 mm A,
iormsVnn-ng Applarauanummrms manor van Amber an m
9 M m.
A notary public or other completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the individual
who signed the document to which this certificate
is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
ivalidity of that document.

State of California
County of Los Anqeles

Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this W?
day of mm 202, by DAM/074' MJHCTleu

proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the
persongsrfwho appeared before me.
JESSE WANG
Comm. 2518066
3w Los Angeles County
California Notary Public x
t Comm. Expires MAY 19. 2029 E
\onu ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 1'

(Seal) Signature

mam-v b (36%vm
3.30 Em 321 [1&- '

M193790q

mu 1'. W N it Ni

IL 1 A ,

I. > 1m? \ r -_
H v n w 2u .m I n. m [,4 an mlcrcsl m the y nmls dcsuihcd m "m al

hul J; on Jpph W .1 1 1

Hhr nnum mmjun. '1 pr n, r
u u m \hp n! m. m- mm nu} mum 3 n- . l, .. 1

m 1h. Am'lu mm 1m: \vmIHqI-Vu-J ~ um my u Ilu In IryIM w v. as I olnu

5-T539143 (i; D Q: 6W 3

W WW I

In \ whm O

M "'1?!
name! 3 . Dmmi M4~$chw Pcrxcmagc Hf mum: N ;

I'uwmagc imam 'l.~

\- r .mm Ilm i mregning information is true and mum thi> 9 A! ZC/Z
da) M

J) W
mm m thmcr. Pnntrd Signature of Proper!) 4 Mm:

Proper!) (Mm: Pnnted
Signature u! Prom-n} ncr

m and before mu. Ihi'x

mum
day

Numn l'ubh 11mm

: 1., 1..
, Inru'mmuw Wm q '11 , Vivi
,_ { ms . .41 mu. annex ,.
MW
134261360!
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate only the identity of the individual
who signed the document to which this certificate
is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
validit of that document.

State of California
County of Los Anqeles

Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this [3 1n
day of Dwmam. ,
20g, by .931 M w

proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the
who appeared before me.
JESSE WANG 2
Comm n 2518066
5v-
Los Angeles County
Caliiornia- Notary Public
E9,

(Seal) Signature

OWWMWP
HENRY COUNTY

HENRY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
an. _-'.:-

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of Commimsioncrs of
Henry Georgia.

We, the undersigned, all of the owucm of all real
propcny of the territory described herein respectfully rcqucst that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the dcanncxation rgqucst of this territory from city boundaries, and extmd the
services to include
' County
the samei

2. The to be duunncxcd is cuntiguuus to
existing unincorporated areas zuid complies with requirements established in
0.C.G.A Title 36. Gimme/'36. The description of such is attached hereto.
territory

0WNER(SJ NAME(3) 30m}

PHONE NUMBER
EMAIL ADDRESS

DEANNEXATION FROM DHAMPTON EILOCUSI GROVE DMCDONOUGH MCKBRIDGE
0 i "

33 0 K 6% r 11,45pt.

' 0 Gf

LAND 2 IZ. ACERAGE .

PARCEL ID NUMBER 30-0 0 70 ZONING I,)ISTRICT(S) S
ONE FORNl PER PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS 1F
REQUIRED.

SIGNATURE(S) DATE 92" "<95,
DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST SIGN AS 'l'llElR NAME
APPEARS 0N T HE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS 1F REQIImED.

NOT Y AND SEAL

(Office use only)
00'5"

l3? pr tgnat ._' .;

Pracedures\0ffice FonnstZoning -
Without Yr\2023 RevisionsWeannexationweannexatton
Application. revused
ska! 3
HENRY COUNTY
(f I -.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

OWNERSHIP VERIFEICATION
The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands
described in the attached deannexation application, which
proposes to amend the Official Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and Of
Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands described in the application is as follows:

Location/Address 3 Z0 l(i mum 'gr00/;5K ,'
5/}; .1
""023 I

Parcel ID Number (5 I36 010 K (a

nmne(s) M55 Percentage Ofinterest:

Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this :

day of DEM ,
528 $255"

Property Printed Signature of Property Owner

Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
day of QLM lam 2 Q g , .

08:. ' c -' E
Notary Public (Seal)

Procedulem '
Application\AP PLICATIONS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexatlon
Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
A} HENRY COUNTY

HENRY Coumv DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Government m --

Residential Declaration
In order to comply with the United States Department of J
procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended,
Subpart B, Section 51.28, the following information is required for
the deannexation of any residential properties. Must be
completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation). Use a; many forms as needed.

0 (sad S
a, G0 3
Location/Address R. "
p G- /

Parcel ID Number 0 ,3 A o l O 3 7 000

Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject
parcel:

2. Description of the residential structures located the
on subject property as listed above:

Wm \r (with Mame.

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each structure:

4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Age Sex Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

ASIr \ WW
Mn W t.

Min [k Mam
4* AL_
5. Henry County Commission District: 2
6. City Council Voting District: )

CERTIFICATION AND
AUTHORIZATION
'I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
above listed information and all attached supporting
documents are complete and accurate.

Applicant Signature Date [
Procedures Ice Forms\20ning Appiication\APPLlCATlQNS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

HEERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
mun-mt w-

Campaign Disclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s),
property owner(s), agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as many forms as
needed.

CHECK ONE: l/AP'PLICANT PROPERTY OWNER AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two
(2) years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts
having in the aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the
Henry County Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No

If Y_es_, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or
attorney representing the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board of Commissioners within ten
(10) days; after this application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam ai n Contributibn to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this
day ,

Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name -
Printed Signature of Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
day of , M

s e550 0 .
46m "egg/pg
5 -'-x
5'2 $01!th
pw \0
.53 E
'9. "#0 291 '

....'III I...l
Notary Public (Seal)

Formsvoning Application\APPLlCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application,
revised
9-28-2023.docx
LETTER

Henry count-y Board ofvCommissioners:
As deannexation requests are not subject to public
hea:ri_ng
requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property from the City of Stockbridge for the
followingreasons: i

1) The territory to be deanneXed is contiguous to existing" unincorporated areas and
complies with requirements establishedIn 0C. G. A Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) prefer to liveIn unincorporated Henry County;

3) i prefer not to live within the city limits of

Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from theCity of Stockbridge, and to extend
CoUnty services to include the same.

Additional comments:

Signature

"5 .51: (oar
Printer Name Date
335

A52
HENRY COUNTY
{Tmwz nmengt

THANK YOU FOR YOURINTEREST IN HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANN EXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY
COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.

A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING IS ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY; AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
VISIT TO SCHEDULE A

MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE-APPLICA TI0N MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED WITH0 UT AN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770)

OF ALL COUNTY RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

140 HEN RY PARKWAY

MCDONOUGH, GEORGIA 30253
HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Deannexation A Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO
CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED COPIES PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

Pre-Application Must be obtained from a
current plariner, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your
application. (OPTIONAL)
Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of owner 5 signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attomey will be
contacted with regards to a request. Only owners and those listed as
applicant or agent/attomey have authorimtion to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be
notarized.

Campaign all property owners, applicants, agents,
attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be
notarized.
Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent. i

Residential Required for any deanexation
request which includes any residential
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property owner(s) name(s) and legal description.
Ownership .

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within
the last years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or land: surveyor registered in the State of
(11 x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines; 3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
square
setbacks, road Frontage, correct
scale, north arrow, and present zoning

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director.

Z:\Planning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revision5\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY
{a If" DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING '& ZONING
HENRY COUNTY
rnmem

APPLICATION FOR
DEMNEXATION
To the Board of Commissioners of Henry County, Georgia.

1. We, the undersigned, all of the owners of all real property of the territory described herein respectfully request that the
Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the deannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the County
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and complies with requirements established in
0.C.G.A Title 36, Chapter 36. The description of such territory is attached hereto.

OWNER(S)NAME(S) .
[Qua

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRES.

DEANNEXATION FROM DHAMPTON EILOCUST GROVE DMCDONOUGH WKBRIDGE

LOCATION/ADDRESS 3 its 1' r 5 00/5 5W1? 2/8!

LAND LOT/DISTRICT ACERAGE ? O

PARCEL ID NUMBER O o 0 Coco ZONING DISTRICT(S) 5R

ONE FORM PER PROPER'I'Y. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF
REQUIRED.

SIGNATURE(S) m DATE 1 -

DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST SIGN AS THEIR NAME
APE'EEARS ON THE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS II" REQUIRED.

t 2
z 5 NQTAQ I
E3 g
p E

1?; DA'I n / .u-
30 I

N "AR SIGNATURE AND SEAL

use only)

Preap'plieation meeting: Title:
Date:
Application ychecked by: Title: Date:

BOC hieetingDate: BOC Decision: Date:

Planning Signature: Date:
Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLtCAT|0NS Without Yr\2023

Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
9~28.2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

OWNERSHIP VERIEICATION
The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands described in the attached application, which
proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands described in the application is as follows:

Location/Address _33 K I {i K 1' 174 DK .
1 /C 3 D (Vi
3 I

Parcel ID Number 0 /'
Jig) 0 026 one

name(s) ,
L 17:0 M W0 95 Percentage of interest: Am: _

Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this 4 day ofM

A1919.v_ Ma? a? 5 jaw: Mg _

Property Printed Signature of Property Owner

Property Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
_/,Q i
day of M, g 25 .

Notary Public (Seal)

2: \Planning_Zoning\0ffice Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Without Vr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
28- 2023. docx
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
my mum;
GENE

Residential Declaration
In order to comply with the United States Department of procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, Subpart B, Sectioin 51.28, the following information is required for
the deannexation of any residential properties. Must be completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of

zoning designation). Use as many forms as needed.

Location/Address (i {:42 i m S 0 S

Parcel ID Number 0 W0! 0 0 0

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject parcel:
2. Description. of the residential structures located on the subject property as listed above:

Wfflql/ATc:
,7 Mm

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each structure: a

4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Age Sex Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

4/ M
352291 awwamgm/

5. Henry County Commission District: 2

6. City Council Voting District: I

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
above listed information and all attached supporting
documents are completeand accurate.

Applicant Signature M Date [9
Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATl0NS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

awn? COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Save

Campaign Disclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s),
property owner(s), agent(s) and/or attorney(s).~ Use as many forms as
needed.

CHECK ONE: \/ APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2)
years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or or made
gifts having in the aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the
more
Henry County Board Of Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No 4/
If Yes, the applicant/property owner/agent
and/or attorney representing the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board ofCommissioners within ten (10)
days; after this application

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member'Name Cam ai n Contribution to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information Is true and correct, this /: day of 96%

kg m

Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name Printed Signature of Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
day of ,
Egg .

I "I,

E if. PUBUO 5:5
E M
'2 r "<5?55
"49k "'7": 2933600
Notary Public (Seal)
Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlONS -

Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
LETTER OF INTEENT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not subject to public hearing requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property from the City of Stockbridge for the

following reasons: '

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and

complies with requirements established in Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) i prefer to live in Unincorporated Henry '

3) I prefer not to live within the city limits of Stockbridge.

Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend County services to include the same.

Additional comments:

Signature

Printed Name Date
prz,

Application

HENRY COUNTY
G m5: m:

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY

COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.

A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING IS ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION
REQUESTS.

THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT PRE-
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY,3AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
TO SCHEDULE A
MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED WITHOUT AN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE-FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 28 8-7526.

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNT RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

140 HENR PARKWAY

MCDONOUGH, EORGIA 30253
HENRY COUNTY

BMW comm? DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
*nmgzi'u:

Deannexation A lication Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED C OPI ES PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

Pre-Application Must be obtained from a current planner, signed, and dated within six (6)

Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your application. (OPTIONAL)

Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attomey will be
contacted with regards request. Only
to a owners as and those listed

applicant or agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be
notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be notarized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent. .

Residential Required for any deanexation request which includes any residential
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property owner(s) name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last five years by a professional

engineer, landscape architect, or land surveyor registered in the State of
(1i x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: I) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines; '3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or square footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
setbacks, road frontage, correct scale, north arrow, and present zoning

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director.

Z:\Plannihg_20ning\0ffice Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zaning Application\APPLlCATION5 -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRYCOUNTY
A $91?
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
mama? comm
vernmum.

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of Commissioners of Henry County, Georgia.

1. We, the undersigned all of the owners of all real property of the territory described herein respectfully request that the Henry
County Board of Commrssroners accept the deannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the County
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be deannexedIS contiguous to existing
unincorporated areas and complies with requirements establishedIn
0 C. G A Title 36 Chapter 36 The description of such territory is attached hereto

OWNER(S) NAME(S) AK {5'4 .5 07070

Laws cm oTU7b

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS

DEANNEXATION FROM El HAMPTON ULOCUST GROVE DMCDONOUGH

LOCATION/ADDRESS Z25: [1595525 DR, 5mg CHE

LAND LOT/DISTRI CT 2 (/1; '

ACERAGE .

PARCEL 1D NUMBER Z 5 Q 5'40ng ZONING DISTRICT(S) 5
ONE FORM PER PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

S]GNATURE(S) DATE Z

DATE 2 {)6 7.13752.
ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST SIGN AS THEIR NAME APPEARS ON THE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

NOT RY GNATURE AND SEAL

useonly) ,

WW; "

Title; 1

:Title

- dispute: :

Z:\Planning_Zonlng\Office Procedures\0ifice Forms\Zoning ApplicationMPPLlCATlONi-i -
WIthout Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
9-28-2023.ch
HENRY COUNTY

HENRY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
(smemmem

OWNERSHIP VERIFICATION

The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands described in the attached deannexation
application, which
proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands described in the application is as follows:

Location/Address 4/.
i I

Parcel ID Number

name(s)
W 0 I

1 gm 5 (:
gm
010 7000

3 T _Q_

07L! 0
Percentage of interest:

Percentage of interest:
60 715

067 c

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this 5 day of 2
1016

,4 14am Show-x
Property Primed Signature of Property Owner

:amemct Sn w0

ms

Property Printed .V

nature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 5 day of ,
M2" .

73":

pUBUC -'
83 p Notary Public (Seal)

Z:\Planning_Zoning\Office Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLtCATl0NS -
Without Vr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING & ZONING

Residential Declaration

In order to comply with the United States
Department of J procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, Subpart B,
Section 51.28, the following information is required for
the deannexation of any residential pmperties. Must be
completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation). Use as many forms as needed.

Location/Address 1 DR , 00 33; 13 (ii Gk 3 152,3]

Parcel ID Number 0 0 7,7000

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject
parcel: \
2. Description of the residential structures located on the subject property as listed above:

W are

3. Total number of persOn(s) residing within each structure:

4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Age Sex
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

@ B 1 wk A PC
a5 gwtok AA
35 Mow AA

.32 Fermw Blow; AA

5. Henry County Commission District: 2.

6. City Council Voting District:

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
above listed information and all attached supporting
documents are complete and accurate.

Applicant Signature Date .2 05' J 0 2.5"
Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATl0NS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Campaign Disclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s),
property owner(s), age'nt(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as many forms as

needed.

CHECK ONE: ,4 APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two
(2) years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts
having inthe aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the
Henry County Board of Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No \/

lf Kg, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or
attorney representing; the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board of Commissioners within
ten (10) days after this application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of =

Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam ai n Contribution to Board Member

L J

We certify that the foregomg information IS true and J cembar
correct, this __
day of Q

Cornell i0u
Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name Printed
594343443 (M 91
Signature of Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this AL day of W, 2 Z 2 .

555

Notary Public (Seal)
Z:\P|anning_Zoning\Office

Forms\Zoning Application\APPUCATIONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions-\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised

9-2&2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

chum?
away mment
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Campaign Disclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), property owner(s),
agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as
many forms as
needed.

CHECK ONE: l/APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER f AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2)
years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts having in the a value of $250 or more to a member of the
aggregate
Henry County Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No
Boaryof
Eyes, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or attorney representing the applicant must file the following information
with the Henry County Board of Comm issioners within ten (10) daysTafter this
application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
'Board Member Name Cam ai n Contribution to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this
day of M b4 / 20} F

(2c m 8 inc \
Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name -
Printed Signature of Applicant/ Property Owner/Agent/Other

2m

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
day of

, 2 2% .

Notary Public (Seal)
Z:\Planning_Zoning\Office Forms\Zoning Application\APPLICATIONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
LETTER OF INTENT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not
subject to public hearing requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge for the
following reasons:

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and
complies with requirements established in O.C.Cj.A Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) I prefer to live in Unincorporated Henry County;
3) Sto'ckbridge.
I prefer not to live within the city limits of

Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend County
seryices to include the same.

Additional comments:

Signature

14%? a. m 9 [[5 W15 Camdlim

slum/5s J l
26 107/5
Printed Name Date
35(

HENRY EQUN'W
{30%er

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY COUNTY; GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY
COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOT ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDAELE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.

A REE-APPLICATION MEETING Is ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DERARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT PRE-
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, %_AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
VISIT HTTP://WWW.CO.HENRY.GA. TO SCHEDULE A

MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE~APPLICA TION MEETING WILL BE COND UCTED WITHO U] 'AN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM. MONDAQY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 288-7526.

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

140 HENRY PARKWAY

McDON OUGH, GEORGIA 30253
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Deannexation A lication Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED :To CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED -
NO EXCEPTIONS

EQ U l R E!) STA FF

ITEMS

Must be obtained from a current planner, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your; appliCetion. (OPTIONAL)

Application Form Signed by owner and notarized; In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy or of

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attorney will be

contacted with regards to a request. Only owners and those listed as

applicant or agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be

Verification notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc. filed
Disclosure Form with an application and must be notarized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent.

Residential Required for any deanexationf request which includes any residential

Declaration property.

Deed of Properly deed showing all property. owner(s) name(s) and legal description
Ownership

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last years by a professional

engineer, landscape architect, or land surveyor registered in the State of
(1 1 x 17) Georgia. Said survey plat shall: .1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measu1enrents of all property lines; 3) include a notation as to the total
acreage 01 square footage of:the subject property; and 4) include all
setbacks, road frontage, con'eet scale, north arrow, and present zoning
classification.

Surveys and Final Plats older tlian five years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director.

Z:\PIanning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATl0N:S Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised

W' HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of
NOTAR AND of
Commissioners
SIGNATURE Henry County, Georgia.
SEAL

1 We, the undersigned, all of the owners of all real property of the territory described herein respectfully request that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the dcannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the County
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be dearurexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and complies with requirements established in
O.C.G.A T[lie Chapter 36 The description of such territory is attached hereto.

0WNER(S) NAMECS) .
324 Mm L.

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRES

DEANNEXATION FROM DHAMPTON DLocusr GROVE DMCDONOUGH MCKBRIDGE

LOCATION/ADDRESS

00/4 I' Z G 3 I

LAND LO'I'IDIS'l'Rl L ACERAGE . 3 '7

PARCEL ID NUMBER DI 0} 0 28 0 ZONING DISTRICT(S)

ONE FORM PROPERTY. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

SIGNATURE(S) DATE
\8/ l3 OONmi.
DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST SIGN AS THEIR NA ME USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS I17 REQUIRED.

W4 )10'9;

,3 .wrssion'n. "

(Office use only)

tea are Date;

Forms\Zoning ApplicationmPPUCATIONS -; Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application. revised
9-28-2023,d0jcx
HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

OWNERSHIP VERIFICATION

The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the lands described in the attached deanneXation application, which

proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and of Hemy County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands descnbed in the application is as follows:

Location/Address 9mm, 8!} 3 OZ
11m

Parcel ID Number 0 I Z #0] D o oo

name(s) DQQI H4 mmmwwkrcentage of interest: 002::
Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this
.amday of 96 '5

Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Property Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 1 day of i [2% (5.014 M 23.

4' 297,? ,.
(<9 3
53.x Notary Public (Seal)

Z:\P|anning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATiONS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application. revised
9-28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PEANNING & ZONING

Residential Declagration
In order to comply with the United States Department of Justicefs procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, Subpart B, Sectiori 51.28, the followinginformation is required for
the deannexation of any residential properties. Miist be completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation); Use as many; forms as needed.

Location/Address 1(5 may);
Z ,7" ,
06/! KR ; J) (752 GPrS '0 2,5"

Parcel ID Number oz
I [G 0 j 0 00??!

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject parcel: \

2. cription of the residential structures: located. on the subject property as listed above:

ERA/403.514 1% M0

81)

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each struicture:

Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: i A Sex Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED vge

(29 P E)
:50 l:

a M B

5. Henry County Commission District: 2-

6. City Council Voting District:

CERTIFICATlON AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledgeand beliefi the above listed information and all attached supporting
documents are Complete and accurate.

Hm;

Applicant Signet Date l3
Forms\Zoning Application\AyPLICATlON$ Without Yr\2023 Hevisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised

HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Campaign Disclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), property owner(s), agent(s) and/or
attorney(s). Use as many forms as
needed.

CHECK ONE: /APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER gAGENT' ATTORNEY

OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2) years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts having in the a value of $250 or more to a member of the
aggregate
Henry County Board of Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No
If Egg, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or attorney
representing the applicant must the following information
with the Heniy County Board of Commissioners within ten (10) days fafter this application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam ai 1] Contribution to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing infonnation is true and correct, this of (or

Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name -
Printed Signatiire of Applicant/Property

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this dayofi

6% I'o Vane
29 261% Q-
I C
Q9 s .

Notary Public (Seal)
"'1: 0U N TY

Application\Al{PLlCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised

9-28-2023.docx
LETTER OF INTENT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not subject to public
hearing requirements, please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property froim the City of Stockbridge for the

following reasons:

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to eXisting unincorporated areas and
complies vyith requirements established in Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) i prefer to live in Unincorporated
County.
3) I prefer not to live within the city
limits of

Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to
exteriid County services to include the same.

Additional comments:

Signature l

Printed Name
/\ 3 19g
Date
42:-
a w

HENRY COUNTY

ovem m cm: ~

THANK You FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY COUNTY. GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE

NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY
COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.

A MEETING Is ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY;AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
VISIT TO SCHEDULE A

MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE-A PPLICA TION MEETING WILL BE COND UCTED WITH0 UT AN APPOINT[MENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 28

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

1.40 HENRY PARKWAY

MCDONOUGH, GEORGIA 30253
\: HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
HENRY sou NF!
m2: 1r

Deannexation A lication Checklist

ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO
CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED COPIES PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

Pre-Application Must be obtained from a current
planner, signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting your
application. (OPTIONAL)
Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of signature, applicant has
signed and notarized a copy of a or of Attorney".

Only owners and those listed as applicant or agent/attorney will be
contacted with regards to a request; Only owners and those listed as

applicant or agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a
request.

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be
notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure Form with an application and must be notarized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent. I

Residential Required for any deanexation request which includes residential
any
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property owfner(s) name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last
years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or land surveyor registered in the State of
(11 x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject property and all buildings and Structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines; 3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
square
setbacks, road frontage, correct scale, north arrow, and present zoning

Surveys and Final Plats older than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Department
Director

Z:\Planning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCAT|ONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation
Application, revised

9-28-2023.docx

HENRY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

APPLICATION FOR DEANNEXATION

To the Board of Commissioners of Henry County, Georgia.

1. We, the undersigned, all of the owners of all real property of the territory described herein respectfully request that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the deannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the C0unty
services to include the same.

2. The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and complies with requirements established in
0. C. GA Title 36, Chapter 36. The description of such territory is attached hereto.

OWNER<S)NAME(S) 0 :ul out Towns.

PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS

DEANNEXATlON FROM El HAMPTON El LOCU ST GROVE DMCDONOUGH WKBKIDOE

LOCATION/ADDRESSV 355 Kg 3 i i 64? 567(8)

LAND LOT/ DISTRICT ACERAGE

PARCEL ID NUMBER 013 0 oz 000 ZONING DISTRICT(S) 5

ONE FORM PER PROPERTY USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

396
SIGNATUREXS) Mg
DATE

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MUST SIGN NAME THE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.

0:2" :1

: Jo =

:QQRTE [97-5
t, g. V .0 s
N A Y SIG TURE AND SEAL

use only)

meeting: Title: Date:

Title: Date:
Application checked by:

BOCJMeeting Date: BOC Decision: Date:

Planning Signature: Date:

Procedures\0ffice Forms\20nlng Application\APPLlCATlONS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT or PLANNING & ZONING
{{ENBY.GOUNW
n'mmzr

OWNERSHIP
VERIFEICATION
The undersigned is'the / an owner of an interest in the lands described in the attached deannexation application, which

proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing municipal jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application. The interest in the lands desicribed in the application is as follows:

Location/Address 436 5' K (473*!) K
s cc i
74334) 64; Cm 23!

Parcel ID Number 0/ 0 O o oo

name(s) [/0 K. [i N}COLL SON/E

Percentage of interest: 40%

Percentage of interest:

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this 3 day of C Q2 5

L066
Property Owner- Printed Signature of Property Owner

Property Printed Signature of Property Owner

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this g day of m, .

W4

39' 12-3629 20?f-"'6*;s$ Notary Public (Seal)
OUNTY %\\\\\\\
Z:\Planning_Zoning\Office Forms\Zcning Applicaticn\APPLICATiONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY
{W DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
=?HENRY COUNTY

Residential Declaration
In order to comply with the United States Department of procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, Subpart B, Section 51.28, the
following information is required for
the deannexation of any residential properties. Must hie completed for ALL residential
properties (regardless of
zoning designation). Use as many; forms as needed.

Location/Address 65 1' DR, -
3/"00k? I? g} D 02/8/

Parcel ID Number 0 13 n D to 7/ DO 0

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject parcel: /
2. Description of the residential structures l0'cated on the subject property as listed above:

79m M

3 Total number of person(s) residing within each structure: 3
4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Age Sex Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

b S
i: Apatmiimg a.

2;) a
m Maw

5. Henry County Commission District: Z

6. City Council Voting District: J

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the above listed information and all attached
supporting
documents are complete and accurate.

Applicant Signature Date ,/
Z:\Planning_Zoning\Office Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APP LICATION'S; Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
\F HENRY COUNTY

(30V
(:0.wa
:1 I:
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING

Campaign Disclosrire Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), property 'owner(s),
agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as many forms as
needed.

CHECK ONE: ,4 APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER a AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2) years
immediately preceding the of this application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts having in the
aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the

Henry'County Board of Commissioners who will consider the application?

Yes No

If the applicant/property owner/agent and/or attorney representing the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board Of Commissioners within ten (10) this application is

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam ai n ContributiOn to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information is true and cOrrect, this S day of 66W ,
353

Lara a (Lhasa? Mm
Applicant/Property Owner/AgenUOther Name Printed Signature of Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this day am, 2 .

COUNTY Notary Public (Seal)
Il

Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation A #3 plication, revised

9-28-2023.docx
LETTER OF INTENT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation requests are not subject to public hearing requirements,
please accept this
written request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge for the
following reasons:

1) The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to existing unincorporated areas and
complies with requirements established in Title 36, Chapter 36.
2) I prefer to live in Unincorporated Henry County:
3) l prefer mat to live within the city limits of
Stockhridge.
Therefore, I respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend County to include the same.

Additional comments:

Signature

[and K 10) (9 J6 A; 5/908?)
Printed Name Date
37K Dz,

HENRY COUNTY
Wemme

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA. THIS PACKET INCLUDES THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS TO BE HEARD BY THE HENRY

COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE NOTE: ALL FEES ARE NON-REFUNDAiBLE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.

A 'PRE-APPLICATION MEETING IS ADVISED, BUT NOT REQUIRED, FOR DEANNEXATION REQUESTS.
THE HENRY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WILL ONLY CONDUCT PRE-
APPLICATION MEETINGS ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY,; AND THURSDAY OF EACH WEEK. PLEASE
VISIT TO SCHEDULE A

MEETING ONLINE.

N0 PRE-APPLICA TION MEETING WILL BE COND UCTED WITHOUT AN APPOINTMENT.

SHOULD YOU NEED FURTHER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE BETWEEN
8:00 AM AND 5:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

AT (770) 288-7526.

THE LOCATION OF ALL COUNTY RELATED BOARD MEETINGS IS:

140 HENRY PARRWAY

MCDONOUGH, GEORCIA 30253
RF HENRY COUNTY

gem? counw DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
Alf-'4'

licatIion Checklist
ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO
CONSIDER APPLICATION COMPLETE.

INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WII.L NOT BE ACCEPTED NO EXCEPTIONS

REQUIRED COPIES
PROCEDURE STAFF INITIAL
ITEMS

Pre-Application Must be obtained from af current planner
signed, and dated within six (6)
Meeting Notes months prior to submitting application. (OPTIONAL)
your
Application Form Signed by owner and notarized. In lieu of owners signature, applicant has
signed'and notarized a copy of a or of

Only owners and those; listed as applicant or agent/attorney will be
contacted with regards to a request; Only owners and those listed as

applicant o1 agent/attorney have authorization to take action regarding a
request

Ownership Required for all property owners with an application and must be
notarized.

Campaign Required for all property owners, applicants, agents, attorneys, etc.
Disclosure F orm with an application and must be notarized.

Letter of Intent Must clearly state the request intent.

Residential Required for any deaneXation request which includes
any residential
Declaration property.

Deed of Property deed showing all property 0M11er(s)name(s) and legal description.
Ownership

As-built Survey Must be prepared and sealed within the last
years by a professional
engineer, landscape architect, or land surveyor 1"egistered1n the State of
(11 x 17)
Georgia. Said survey plat shall: 1) indicate the complete boundaries of the
subject p1 operty and all buildings and structures existing therein; 2) include
measurements of all property lines; 3) include a notation as to the total
acreage or square footage of the subject property; and 4) include all
setbacks, road frontage, correct scale, north arrow, and present zoning
class1f' cation

Surveys and Final Platsiolder than years at time of submission may be
accepted per the discretion of the :Planning and Zoning Department
Director

2: \Planning_Zoning\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLiCATlONS Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application revised
9- 23- 2023. docx
HENRY COUNTY

EL} :5

DEPARTMENT OF
HENRY coumv

"Government:
PLANNING '& ZONING

APPLICATION FOR
DEANNEXATION
To the Board of Commissioners of Henry
County, Georgia.
1. We, the undersigned, all of the owners of all real property of the territory described herein respectfully
request that the Henry
County Board of Commissioners accept the deannexation request of this territory from city boundaries, and extend the
County
services to include the same. '

2. The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to
existing unincorporated
areas and complies with requirements established in
006/! Title 36, Chapter 36. The description of such territory is attached hereto.

0WNER(S)NAME(S) Aaui- 10%?

Jnmf/S L ow:

PHONE NUMBER '2 EMAIL

DEANNEXATlON FROM IZIHAMPTON DLOCUST dROVEi DMCD c. w

LOCATION/ADDRESS { mi cl: 1" i G Pr 6L8!

LAND LOT/DISTRICT z, ACERAGE -

PARCEL ID NUMBER Di 0 '10 z 0 o 00 .
ZONING DISTRICT(S) 5

ONE FORM PER PROPERTY. USE AliDlTlONA L SHEETS [I7 REQUIRED.

SIGNATURE(S) DATE 392:9
DATE 6 10
ALL PROPERTY SIGN IEIR NAME APPEAERS ON THE DEED. USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF REQUIRED.
uiuuuum i

4%,,5,, )
{535on
3* is}.
5 s.
3"- m

N0 A SIGNATURE AND SEAL
21':
531g]; /3 -

20,1?

:Pregapia'iicatidn meeting: Title: Date:

Application by: Title: Date:

BOCMeeting_Date: .

BOG Decision:
Date:

Signature:

__'_; Date:
Z:\Planning~Zoning\Office Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATlOfNS Without Yr\2023 Revisicns\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised

9-28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF
HENRY COUNTY
PLANNING & ZONING

OWNERSHIP VERIEICATION
The undersigned is the / an owner of an interest in the; land-s
described in the attached deannexation application, which
proposes to amend the Zoning Map of the deannexing munipipal jurisdiction and of Henry County, Georgia, and
concurs in the application: The interest in the lands described in the application is as follows: V

Location/Address 7f C M

0 OK Go?
Parcel ID Number 0 I D [0 o 006

name(s) &N N i 3" Lbi Percentage of interest:

3%?) L Lab? Percentage of interest: @517

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this day of

24/7025 3J/A24 e 52 i5 , 4

Property Printed v Signature Of W wner

,IJBUZ
Property Printed Sign
0 "(J
_ure 0 Prope Owner

q 7% i ___day IM

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this of
29 233

#41929 29:12: 0Q.- S: Notary Public (Seal)

Forms\Zoning Application\APPClCATlONS -
Without Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised
HENRY COUNTY

Baum mum DEPARTMENT OF
(1)0 xii rasmem PLANNING & ZONING
Residential Declaration
In order to comply with the United States Department of
S. procedures for the administration of Section 5
of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended, B, Section 51. 28, the following information'is required for
Subpart
the deannexation of any residential properties. Must
Ibe completed for ALL residential properties (regardless of
zoning designation) Use as many forms as needed.

Location/Address 7 / :DR- S 0161? 121' 91' GA 3o 2,3]
Parcel ID Number 0/ Pie 0 o oo 0

1. Total number of existing residential structures located on the subject parcel: /

2. Description of the residentiai structuresE located on the subject property as listed above:

3. Total number of person(s) residing within each
structure:

4. Age, Sex, and Race of each of those individuals: Race
USE ADDITIONAL FORMS IF NEEDED

@97: F [7% W

(0&7 M 2..

5. Henry County Commission District:

6. City Council Voting District: /

CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
I hereby certify that, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, the above listed information and all attached supporting
documentsare complete
and accurate

Applicant Signature _
Date
Pr Forms\Zo g A ATIQNS WithoutYr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexat'on Application, revised

28-2023.docx
X; HENRY COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
COUNTY
(Eavemme: 11:

Campaign D1sclosure Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), property owner(s),
agent(s) and/or attorney(s). Use as many forms as

needed.

CHECKONE: Z APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2) years immediately
preceding the ofthis application campaign
contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts havingin the aggregate a value of $250 or more to a member of the
Henry County Board of Commissioners who will consider the application?
Yes No 1

[f Ye__s_, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or attorney representing the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board OfCOmmissioners within ten (10) days after this
applicationis

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar amount of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
Board Member Name Cam at n Contribution to Board Member

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this
day of $19

Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Ot r Name Printed Signature of plican roperty O ner/Agent/Other

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this day 23 .

NOT/w in

s s

a 7, =. v $5
.24) J;
"'SEJUNTY. Notary Public (Seal)
Forms\Zoning Application\APPLtCATlONS Withojut Yr\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Dean,nexation Application, revised
9-28-2023.docx
HENRY COUNTY

HENRY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
(5mm: r.nm-L m.

Campaign Disclosrire Form
Must be completed by ALL applicant(s), prOperty owner(s),
agent(s) and/orvattorney(s). Use
as many forms as

needed.

CHECK ONE: l/APPLICANT

PROPERTY OWNER
AGENT ATTORNEY OTHER

Has the person described below made, within two (2)

contributions aggregating $250 or more or made gifts having in the
years immediately preceding the of this application campaign
a value of $250 or more to a member of the
aggregate
Henry County who will consider the
application?
Yes No

If Xgs, the applicant/property owner/agent and/or
attorney representing the applicant must the following information
with the Henry County Board of Commissioners within ten
daysi after this application is filed:

Commissioner/Zoning Advisory Dollar nt of Description of Gift $250 or greater given
BoardMember Name Cam ai n Co tribution to Board Member

glday

ZEWQ

We certify that the foregoing information is true and correct, this // of 92;

1W5 L. 33L 5 Q
Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Other Name -
Printed 8 mt of Applicant/Prop tier/Ag t/Other

Swomto and
| mthis day Of DXM a,
_W4;:"n
ea. 0 ..

Notary Public (Seal)
Z:\Pianning_ZonIng\Office Procedures\0ffice Forms\Zoning Application\APPLlCATI NS -

Withdut Y}\2023 Revisions\Deannexation\Deannexation Application, revised

9-28-202 .docx
LETTER OF INTENT

Henry County Board of Commissioners:

As deannexation are not subject to public hearing requirements, please accept this
requests
written request for the deannexation of my property from the City of Stockbridge for the
following reasons: I
The territory to be deannexed is contiguous to
1) existing unincorporated areas and

complies with requirements established in Title 36, Chapter 36.

2) I prefer to live in Unincorporated Henry
County;
3) I prefer not to live within the city limits of
Stockbridge.

Therefore, l respectfully ask for you to accept this request for the deannexation' of my property
from the City of Stockbridge, and to extend County
seniices to include the same.

Additional comments:

ignature

Printed Name Dat
mI
:5: .2126" 5.:
5-;:53
.5: 3.2.: uz_z .<

I .2
._.5 .253: Ir}.Anvh:

in. . 4
Qg
7: 5

3 n2.
Fr
30
no
.2 5: .5:

{a W .4

I. w
mm
5.:- s

.27
"Ir
A 0

:15
a .6 .23.
mhuxmu
a m

m#o..oz<. BEBE .rhzag

wet 5.3
5.. a I Do
n. m
In
oo
an .5

205525
._-u 2

no
.2 : =2:
no you

mI I. I z.
Ezu: 3. Burn
s r a.

.52.

on
co.
adeuoI. "349m ..
ion
.53:

:58
fa. . is

adv S
{Poem 1.6 v
s zu

uuu .26.

5,214

"32.2. :5
uIun
.2 a. \
m. n z ,2 \ m
I I\
2.5 .352

isms. .4.?,.
23 1
v. E. .
x r\ I. . 3.
=7, a

II. \\ _

LAME:

a _n

\ m. w

u. a s t z sn z

Jinxuxou

n I n

I II I I I
umou
. +3.1 I
.m M
v ,2 n I I
3 5 .v . - .
I I

35:3: nM
um

mI I :

El.
Jv-i:

II.

m a. u.n M

my
. I_ N. aw

:5 :5 .3 on

n. 3

Id1w 3 I
m, up. v.3 an

m .I 1 v

Sta
ISMI E

a. it /
I3 :3
:3 13:

IIIIIIIII

Er..._.._..wu

77

INIy. .

F: I; L
0 .V
79
59
522.: :35
:3 . .Suoiam
Henry County EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING

Meeting Date: Department Requesting Agenda Item:

January 20, 2026 Planning & Zoning

Action Type: Attachments/Exhibits for Agenda Item:

1. Executive Summary
2. Resolution
A c t ton requeSted by 30C
3, Staff Report

I: For informational purposes only

Presenter: Toussaint Kirk, Cluster Leader

Agenda Item:

Henry County has received a request for deannexation from the City of Stockbridge to

Unincorporated Henry County for a total of six (6) properties located at 330, 335, 345, 355,
365, 375 Kerrith Drive consisting of a combined 7.068 +/- acres in Land Lot 25 of the 12th
District. District 2

Applicant: Various Owners Case Number: DE-AX-25-02
Commission District: District 2

Background/Summary:

The owners of the subject property are requesting the 100% deannexation method from the

municipal boundaries of the City of Stockbridge to the unincorporated limits of Hemy County

Financial Implications/Considerations: N/A

The project is budgeted. 01'

The project will require the use of Fund Balance.

If yes, please state amount

The project will require no funds. Of

The project is grant funded and will require % match
and those funds are/are not budgeted.

Is this request a Capital Project and part of the Capital Project

List?

P:\BOC\BOC Executive Summaries\2026\.lanuary Manderley (6 lots), 01-20-2026 BOCdocx
Additional Comments / Recommendation:

It is Planning & Zoning staffs opinion that the deannexation would not be detrimental to the

health, safety, and welfare of the residents and property owners of the area to be deannexed or
to the area remaining within the City of Stockbridge.

P:\BOC\BOC Executive Summaries\2026\January Manderley (6 lots), 01-20-2026 BOC.docx
MARCH 9, 2026

Ryan Anderson

Community Development

DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-02 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 10. Consideration of an
Ordinance to de-annex from the Stockbridge City Limits six (6) parcels within the Manderley Subdivision, representing
Phase 10. The request was made by the owners of the six parcels. The Henry County Board of Commissioners
adopted a resolution on January 20, 2026 to consent to the de-annexation and allow the parcels to become a part of
unincorporated Henry County.

The City Council previously approved eight (8) phases of de-annexation for the Manderley Subdivision (Cases DX-
2024-01 through DX-2024-08). City Staff are now recommending the denial of DX-2026-02 (Henry County's de-
annexation Case #DE-AX-2025-02) due to State annexation laws which require the denial of de-annexation requests
whenever a municipality has any bonded indebtedness.

$0.00
DE-ANNEXATION CASE #DX-2026-02 FOR THE MANDERLEY SUBDIVISION, PHASE 10.

DENIAL, in accordance with State de-annexation regulations.
