(Preliminary! – From 11/16/15 Strategic Planning Session)

I-75 CC GOALS 1a. Compile/Overlay Existing Zoning, Uses & Infrastructure of Corridor

1b. Develop Comprehensive, Coordinated & Complementary Zoning (from Master Plan)

2. Raise Enthusiasm for Change by Building Trust 3. Define Service Delivery Districts 4. Obtain Senior Leadership Buy-In

I-75 Corridor Council Flint Energies Member Center

98 Carl Vinson Parkway – Warner Robins Wednesday – May 18, 2016

11:45 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

- AGENDA-

I. Call to Order Commissioner Melvin Walker CHAIRMAN II. Invocation/Blessing TBA

~ Lunch is Served ~ III. Subcommittee Meeting Reports

o Master Plan BJ Walker

o Intergovernmental Trust Building Jimmy Autry

o Service Delivery Jay Flesher

o Promotions Robert Smith

o Funding No Report IV. Update on ….

o USDA discussion Jay Flesher o MGRC Official Request Laura Mathis o Placeholder website Robert Smith

V. Proposed Next Steps Commissioner Melvin Walker CHAIRMAN VI. Adjourn

Next Meeting is Wednesday, June 22 – 11:45 a.m. at the Flint Member Center

Promotion Subcommittee Meeting Report

Meeting Date/Time: April 28, 2016; 10:00 a.m. Meeting Location: Flint Energies Center; Warner Robins, GA In Attendance: Jay Flescher, Flint Energies Jimmy Autry, Flint Energies Sam Perren, MGRC Tiffany Peavey, City of Byron Jade Morey, Houston County Development Authority Rich Bennett, Peach County Gary Lee, Warner Robins Robert Smith, Perry (Chair)

Chairman Smith and the group welcomed new members to the subcommittee including Tiffany Peavey, Rich Bennett, and Jade Morey. A brief overview was provided regarding the subcommittee’s work up to that time and the overall mission of the Council.

The March meeting was discussed generally and new input was sought.

Jimmy Autry presented a well-done Q&A document to the group. It was discussed how important this document will be in ensuring a consistent and unified message is presented to the community, stakeholders, officials, etc. The document is to be a living document that can be amended as necessary throughout the process to address specific issues and/or questions. The document will be placed on the website.

General discussion regarding how to best educate the communities and promote the I75 Corridor effort were had:

o Outreach efforts must be tailored to each community with the benefits to each community at the forefront.

o People must be made “comfortable”. Find common “wins”. o The outsider dictates development.

Following the June Corridor Council meeting/social event, the effort will be presented to each stakeholder group. It will be determined how best to tailor each presentation for each body while remaining consistent regarding our message.

o The goal is to have vetted the effort with each stakeholder group by August 2016. o Determine who will present to each body and how they will present. o Utilize the available PowerPoint. o Perhaps conduct a “Train the Trainer” course prior to the meetings to ensure

consistency and effectiveness.

A placeholder website is to be created for internal use in disseminating information.

Page 1 of 3

Summary of Master Planning Sub-Committee Meeting

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

In attendance: BJ Walker, Chairman Jill Bowen Martin Moseley Tiffany Bibb Lee Hauesler David Cleveland Angie Gheesling Rickey Blalock (late arrival – met with BJ privately) The meeting started promptly at 10:00 a.m. BJ distributed a handout for each committee member to review and began the discussion with a brief and general recap of what had happened to date and to go over what was being asked of this particular sub-committee in order to bring everyone up to speed. The group moved into a discussion regarding the need to clearly identify the focus areas moving forward. BJ suggested focusing on Phase I (refer to map) and asked the group for input. Conversation that ensued: BJ: We need to clearly define the area we are talking about. AG: It might be easier to go parcel by parcel. MM: We’ve recently released data to the MGRC so they have our information. AG: It definitely makes sense to have the MGRC involved and represented on this committee. DC: Yes, I agree. AG: I had Kate work on the property listing and I know Laura (Mathis) has the information prepared by Kate. BJ: The land use maps are online but I don’t know about zoning. Do you want to further define the area? Is it retail/commercial? Is it hotel/motel? Is it service related? What about the area on Vietnam Veterans Parkway? Let’s look at that too. AG: Do we even classify things the same way? MM: I think we’re close but we need to ask and be sure. BJ: We can come up with our own classification if need be and move on to the next step. MM: We do need to be on the same page. DC: What Jay and Bob said at earlier meetings was to send the info to GA Tech and get their input. BJ: That’s what we’re moving towards - pursuing market studies from maybe UGA and Tech. We’ll need to look at where the funding sources will come from. AG: We might want to look for free resources.

Page 2 of 3

BJ: I know the MGRC has the ability. They can do the land use study and we’ll need data to back that up. Maybe we’ll contact them to get estimates on doing a study. AG: Maybe ECG can take the lead. The group in Atlanta and in particular, Jim O’Brian … he’s an expert on the retail end of things. He could help direct us. LH: We have partnerships and can utilize both resources and get what we want between the two. BJ: Do we need to look at trend data? LH: We can touch base with our contacts to see what they have available at GEMC, etc. BJ: I think it’s going to be a minimum of six months before you get the studies back. What do you think? We might want to start working with the promotions committee. LH: Do you want us (FVUC) to check for sources? BJ: Yes. We need to know if there will be funds to pay for the studies. AG: So, we want them to do what? Investigate best use? BJ: I don’t know how to answer that. Those guys do that for a living and can investigate trends and the dynamics and answer things like what can that area support now, etc. and uncover the regional capacity to do what. When we get the info back, it might not be a bad idea to get conceptual designs or bubble designs for things that are best suited. Bring in the community and find out if they agree before you move into precise land-use plans. It’s hard to force long-term site plans. At least this way, it gives market options to get things started. AG: Right, in essence ‘this is what we’d like to see’ when you start approaching the developers. They want to know where they are restricted etc. BJ: Yes, once we start approaching people to do design work, that’s where we start getting into a lot more work and money. Maybe we should focus on some specific areas. DC: If they could come up with some concepts – that would be good. We could get started with that. BJ: Maybe select a 100 acre tract and show some examples. Maybe take 1 road at a time? Anyway, we need to come up with measurable goals and objectives but I think that’s hard to determine right now. the biggest reason is needing infrastructure maps and identifying existing utilities. The City of Byron, City of Warner Robins and the utility commission … we need the water and gas service areas. Power is not that big an issue right now. LH: I think we all know where we can go. BJ: Like where are the manholes, force mains, how do we get service there. We don’t want to start working with a broker on a deal and then spend the next 6 months fighting about service areas. LH: The electric service areas are very well defined. The water and sewer maps … we need everyone to sign off. MM: That’s the end result goal but I don’t know how to get to that. We have issues with some areas and there are some that think they have a right to them. We basically just want to be prepared and be ready ahead of time. LH: There will be some cases where there might be an issue but we do need to know for sure. BJ: What’s the biggest thing we can help with? I guess independent maps well defined and then maybe overlay? TB: We have water and sewer mapped out for sure. Not sewer and we do have the different layers. I can get them prepared and pulled together, BJ: Are there any areas with a disagreement on service? TB: Yes. AG: Are these areas within the city? County? Is there any sort of agreement in place? Let me follow-up on the Warner Robins end of things. DC: Is that our responsibility? BJ: How do we move forward without this information? DC: I think there is a committee assigned to the service … the service delivery committee?

Page 3 of 3

BJ: We probably need someone from the utilities to represent. LH: I think me and Keith Spillers are on that committee too. BJ: Jill, is there anything from promotions that you want to share? JB: Nothing new, really. We’re still working towards pulling our resources together to identify appropriate steps moving forward. The whole senior leadership buy-in idea hinges on knowing exactly what it is we are aiming to do, why and where. Once we have a better idea and have feedback from the other committees, we can really move things along. BJ: Okay, great. So, what’s next? Let’s talk about our homework … The group concluded with an outline of homework/action items assigned as follows:

1. Lee Hauesler would call his contacts at ECG for advice and guidance. 2. BJ would contact the MGRC about maps, doing studies etc. 3. Angie would try to get with her contacts at the state level for suggestions on available resources

and get with WR on service delivery areas. 4. Tiffany Bibb will work on service maps for City of Byron and the overlays.

It was decided that the group would reconvene on Friday, April 29, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. at the DAPC conference room located at 425 James E Khoury Drive, Fort Valley, Georgia. Meeting adjourned. Rickey Blalock arrived at 11:10 a.m. (he had called prior to say he would likely be running late) and met with BJ Walker privately to discuss what had transpired during the meeting.

Page 1 of 2

Summary of Master Planning Sub-Committee Meeting

Friday, April 29, 2016 In attendance (appointed members): BJ Walker, Chairman Tiffany Bibb Lee Hauesler David Cleveland Rickey Blalock Guests: Mill Graves Sam Perren Robert O’Neill Jill Bowen Absent: Martin Moseley Angie Gheesling Sherri Windham The meeting started promptly at 10:00 a.m. BJ distributed a handout for each committee member to review and began the discussion with a brief and general recap of what had happened to date. A copy of the Revised Goals and Objectives was reviewed. BJ asked everyone if they had any comments to add in order to get a better idea of the general plan moving forward. The group briefly discussed the particulars. Sam Perren said, “I think we are on track and we (the MGRC) are happy to help”. BJ said, “If everyone agrees, let’s go ahead and approve the Goals & Objectives and then share them”. Everyone was in agreement. The group moved into a discussion regarding the work that Robert O’Neill and Sam Perren had been working on to date. A presentation was made and the group reviewed the mapping capabilities available through the MGRC. Conversation that ensued: SP: Robert put together some maps with existing infrastructure and the MGRC is working on a shared land use map for the group at the Corridor.

Page 2 of 2

RB: I like that once we come back with the maps with a proposed land use, we can overlay with the existing maps we have. BJ: How can we determine what’s best on this corridor? Do we need demographic layers? Most of this area is developed or agricultural. MG: You could do conceptual mapping with roads and traffic patterns. Maybe heat maps? What do you all think makes sense at this point? It’s good to look at what’s there and what works. RO: Yes, and what about water and sewer? MG: Maybe review each road with service and determine which roads are already at capacity, etc. SP: Yes, and a traffic count. RO: Some of that information might come from GDOT. BJ: These maps need to be ready for the next big group meeting in May in order to update everyone and show them progress. I think we are a couple of steps away from proposed land use. This information should be used to start the conversation; we’re not leading this charge – we’re just making suggestions. The group came to a general consensus to add to the existing service area maps the items discussed during the presentation and to be sure to highlight zoning, existing land use, traffic counts, water/sewer capacities and the road networks. Robert O’Neill and Sam Perren agreed to coordinate and work on that for the next big council meeting. Tiffany Bibb updated the group on the current and existing service locations for the City of Byron. She presented a large area map highlighting the particulars for the group to review. Mill Graves gave a detailed slide presentation on a retail analysis/service delivery strategy ECG prepared for another community in Georgia. The group concluded with an outline of homework/action items assigned as follows:

1. Robert O’Niell and Sam Perren would continue working on the maps with the appropriate overlays as discussed during the meeting

2. The MPSC would be prepared to present their progress at the upcoming full Council meeting on May 18, 2016.

It was decided that the group would reconvene at a TBD date after the general Council meeting on May 18, 2016. Meeting adjourned.

I-75 Corridor Council Utility Service Subcommittee

- AGENDA-

Barbara Williams City of Fort Valley Jay Flesher, Chair Flint Energies Jim Elliott City of Warner Robins Keith Spillers Fort Valley Utility Commission Lee Hauseler Fort Valley Utility Commission Michael Chidester City of Byron Montie Walters City of Warner Robins Wayne James Jointly Owned Paul Schwindler Peach County

• We welcomed the group including those that had not been involved with the corridor council up to this point: Paul Schwindler, Peach Co. and Montie Walters, City of Warner Robins and Wayne James, Jointly Owned. We had each member introduce themselves to the group and then introduced the mission of the I-75 Corridor Council and the Subcommittee’s objective.

• Wayne James discussed the County Wide Safety Plan and how that document, which each county has in place, affects

how the service areas are currently divided up.

• We discussed the services each utility provider delivers in or near the corridor: o City of Byron – Water o City of Warner Robins – Water & Sewer o Fort Valley Utility Commission – Water, Sewer, Natural Gas o Jointly Owned – Natural Gas

• We also discussed the need to generate a GIS map that shows all the utility infrastructure that would show current

capabilities within or around the corridor. Lee Hauseler mentioned that the MGRC attended the Master Planning subcommittee meeting and had a map of utilities that include Ft. Valley Utility, Byron and Centerville. Warner Robins and Perry were not currently included. We have made a request for those organizations to forward information to be included.

• Mayor Williams suggested that all discussions on service provider area and capabilities need to remain a “front channel communication” so that the rest of the organizations are kept in the loop.

Next Steps:

• Finish collecting utility mapping for the corridor area

• Ask each provider to share current load capabilities and future plans in current environment

• Start strategic plan development based on potential developments and look for win – win opportunities that could move utility service ahead with minimal cost & short lead times.

• Continue to look for strengths each provider brings to the corridor and focus on how to combine those strength to create more marketable opportunities

Promotion Subcommittee Meeting Report

Meeting Date/Time: April 28, 2016; 10:00 a.m. Meeting Location: Flint Energies Center; Warner Robins, GA In Attendance: Jay Flescher, Flint Energies Jimmy Autry, Flint Energies Sam Perren, MGRC Tiffany Peavey, City of Byron Jade Morey, Houston County Development Authority Rich Bennett, Peach County Gary Lee, Warner Robins Robert Smith, Perry (Chair)

Chairman Smith and the group welcomed new members to the subcommittee including Tiffany Peavey, Rich Bennett, and Jade Morey. A brief overview was provided regarding the subcommittee’s work up to that time and the overall mission of the Council.

The March meeting was discussed generally and new input was sought.

Jimmy Autry presented a well-done Q&A document to the group. It was discussed how important this document will be in ensuring a consistent and unified message is presented to the community, stakeholders, officials, etc. The document is to be a living document that can be amended as necessary throughout the process to address specific issues and/or questions. The document will be placed on the website.

General discussion regarding how to best educate the communities and promote the I75 Corridor effort were had:

o Outreach efforts must be tailored to each community with the benefits to each community at the forefront.

o People must be made “comfortable”. Find common “wins”. o The outsider dictates development.

Following the June Corridor Council meeting/social event, the effort will be presented to each stakeholder group. It will be determined how best to tailor each presentation for each body while remaining consistent regarding our message.

o The goal is to have vetted the effort with each stakeholder group by August 2016. o Determine who will present to each body and how they will present. o Utilize the available PowerPoint. o Perhaps conduct a “Train the Trainer” course prior to the meetings to ensure

consistency and effectiveness.

A placeholder website is to be created for internal use in disseminating information.

CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN

PEACH COUNTY PROPERTY TAX MAP IDENTIFIER