Boma - Regular Meeting

Thank you, Joey. And we're going to call the work  session for the board of mayor and alderman for   March 24th, 2026 to order. Let's do the roll  call. Alman Barnhill here. Alman Plant here.   Alman Caesar. Alman Peterson here. Alman  Burger. Alman Brown. Alman Pototts pres.   And Vice Mayor Bagot. And the mayor is here  also. So everybody's here. Um, next item on   the agenda is opportunity for citizens to make  comments on items that are not on the agenda. I   have no speaker card for that. We'll continue  to move on. We're going to item number one,   which is resolution 2026-11 to approve  the American 250 unity trees mural mosaic Mon'nique. Yes. Good evening. Franklin Tomorrow  has submitted a proposal for a community mural   to be placed on city property. Um, Mindy Day  with Franklin Tomorrow is here to tell you a   little bit more about it, but I just wanted  to say that the public arts commission is   recommending approval unanimously. Thank you. Good  evening. Good evening. How are y'all? Um, so we   may we had a great day on Saturday at working with  Mon'nique and the city on the Kids Arts Festival   of Tennessee on this Unity Tree community mural.  This is a project of America's 250th and will be   part of that recognition um because it is our  intent as we complete this mosaic mural to gift   it to the city of Franklin similar to what we  did with the Christmas tree several years ago   where it becomes the property of the city.  So on the next SL you can see the the basic   uh configuration of this of the mural. Now there  are 900 total pieces in the mural. 600 of them   to be painted and on Saturday we completed  382 of those pieces with kids and families  

of Franklin. So we'll go to the next one. So what  happens is it's transitions from that basic blue   mural and a lot of people thought they were just  coming to paint something blue, red or green. Uh,   but no, they got to personalize it with their  imagery. And the next slide shows a little bit   of the crowd there. And some of the slides,  the mayor's slide there. Um, and then the   tones and colors in this are blue, a blue basic  tile, a warm tile, which is the orange tiles,   and then the green tiles. And so the majority  of your tile is painted that basic color.   But then you can personalize it in any way that  you want. And we got a lot of inspiring messages   on them. And we're working through now once we  complete this the next 200 tiles. Basically,   we're going to work with the library and other  organizations. We'd love each of you to have the   chance to paint a tile. And we've got stencils.  So, if you're not an artist, it's okay. We've got   stencils and different things that you can do,  but you can personalize them and include them.   Um the mural is an 8 by 12 8 feet by 12 feet  mural. Um and it's built with three different   panels and it is our uh in discussion with the  um arts commission. I think the recommendation is   that it would uh initially be placed at Pinkerin  Park and then could be available to use for the   new city hall park or as a piece of art in the  new city hall at some point in the future. So, and it it was a it is a gift from Franklin  tomorrow and it has about an $8,000 value um   as a gift to the city of Franklin. Any questions  for Mindy or Mon'nique? Paint your tiles. Thank  

you. Thank you. Item two is resolution 2026-08, a  resolution authorizing the city to submit a 2026   local parks and recreation fund outdoor recreation  grant application for public improvements for   undeveloped park known as Creekide. Thank you,  mayor. Good evening. Um, what's before you is   a grant, a resolution to apply for the grant.  This is a 50/50 match. Uh, a total of around $3.5   million for the newly acquired Creekide property.  This would allow for ingress, egress, design,   infrastructure installation, public restrooms,  trails, and so we would come before you again   if the city is awarded the grant to either accept  the grant at whatever amount whether it's in full   or partial, but this is to allow us to apply for  that grant. Questions? Thank you. Okay. Thank you,   Lisa. Next is resolution 2026-10, a resolution  establishing a steer steering committee for the   central parking Franklin study or central Franklin  parking study. And good evening, mayor and   alderman. Um, this resolution proposes a steering  committee to oversee the Central Franklin parking   study. The proposed committee is made up of 16  volunteers with experiential knowledge and a great   interest in the success of downtown Franklin. The  committee will guide the study, provide oversight,   insights, and hopefully serve as ambassadors for  the study to their respective organizations and   networks to maximize public input and engagement.  The proposed committee members are all listed in   the resolution and generally includes downtown  business and property owners, downtown residents,   Heritage Foundation events management staff, uh,  DFA leadership, Visit Franklin, Williamson County   government, and elected officials, including  Commissioner Sean Ielo and Alderman Patrick   Bagot. The mayor's office has reached out to all  of the members, and they have accepted. The mayor  

asked Bob Ravener to serve as chair and it is  anticipated that the steering committee will meet   four times in the next year and a half and each  meeting will be noticed in the paper open to the   public with meeting summaries provided. Thank you,  mayor. Questions Andrew? Okay, we'll keep rolling   along. Item four is resolution 2026-15 to adopt  an electronic signature policy. So, this policy   will um allow for certain documents to be signed  electronically. I know we're already doing that,   but then it came to our attention that through  some of the new technology, we might be able   to have permits signed electronically. And when  that happens, I'm thinking in particular maybe   even beer board. Um when that happens, we need  it better if we had a policy that the board says   these electronic signatures are valid and accepted  by the city. So, that's what this does. is it just   allows us to clean up what we're already doing  but then allow for new possible permits to be   signed electronically. Alderman Caesar, you  mentioned beer board which we just completed   and I think there is something significant while  I am super supportive of the efficiency that's   offered by electronic and the traceability. I do  have some value I still believe and how do we put   the signature on the wall in the establishment  and you know maybe that's old school of me but it   gives I think the entire population as well as the  folks that work at that facility kind of something   physical to hang on the wall so I don't know how  we land that but that would be a piece that maybe   we want to consider if we're going to move to  electronic signature how then does that affect our   posting ability and that is completely up to each  board and commission and each um topic. Obviously,   if if beer board does not want to do that,  you wouldn't. Um you guys would just continue   signing. But we do a lot of electronic signatures  through Docu Sign. Um I would say daily. So most  

of what I do in my business world, I don't  physically go somewhere to sign, but I also   not required to hang the sign that says and so  maybe we would have to think about that at the   individual commission level. Yeah. And there is  something nice about the wet signature. I agree. Any other questions? Alman Peterson. I was  reading part B um number two. No number   two. Yeah. Part B number two. It's got signers  misspelled. Which one is that? It's okay. And Oh,   okay. B part B two. The second line it says all  authorized SI G N O R S. Okay. Thank you. Yes,   we this is an MTAS form that we're adopting,  but thank you very much. We'll fix that. Burger Sea, would we um would there be certain  situations where a department or a certain   document that you would just require to be signed  in person? You know, resolutions and ordinances   are some that we we really it we did it during CO.  We signed a lot digitally during co but you know   those are are kept and archived and there they  are a document that we have to keep forever like   there's never a time we can shred or throw away  a resolution or ordinance. So those being signed   digitally are not ideal. It's better to have them  signed wet. Um and then you know maybe some court   documents, settlement documents, closing documents  whenever we have uh real estate condemnation   cases, those kind of things. So, do we have to  state that or we how will those decisions be made?   Well, it'll probably be made by the director. Um,  it'll be a case by case situation, but right now   we're already doing that. We're already signing  a lot of contracts digitally. Um, so I we're kind  

of already making a case by case call on it. And  sometimes we can't sign it um digitally at all.   Like for example, you know, banks require wet  signatures if we're going to do anything with   a bank, if we're going to close. So those those  are times when we can't use it either way. Bonds,   things like that. Yeah. Bonds. Mhm. Okay. So all  those decisions can be made internally then even   if we need to go ahead and do I'm I'm for this.  I think we need to do this. But the necessary   ones will be made decisions running by legal.  Right. Yeah. That Right. Right. And Yeah. And we   may be told we won't accept digital. Sure. Yeah,  some of them won't be we were clear. All right,   thanks. Okay, continue moving on. Item five  is resolution 2026-9 authorizing the city of   Franklin to join the new national opioid  settlement with six regional distributors   uh dispenser defendants uh remnant defendants  settlement associated pharmacy and American   Associated Pharmacy Smith Corporation Louisiana  wholesale drug company Morrison Dixon company   North Carolina Mutual wholesale drug company  and United Natural Foods Inc. including its   subsidiaries, super value and advantage logistics.  Um, so as the opioid cases continue to be filed,   um, we keep being asked to join the class action  and this is another uh, class action. I think this   will make five class actions that we will be a  part of if we agree to do this. As we've said   before, we've kind of already created the path to  be in these class actions. So, I would encourage   us to continue that path. We obviously wouldn't  sue on our own. Um, there is a lot of money um   that will be part of this particular uh settlement  and um if bad things happen in our city, I think   we deserve to have the fair share come back to our  city as a settlement. Everybody good? Item six is  

City of Franklin contract number 2024-0174  with First Bank for a Stafle certificate. Basically, this is just uh  uh transferring the current   lease that we have to a new owner of  the white building on 9inth Street. No change of terms. Item seven is a  vent permit for wind down Main Street   sponsored by the Boys and Girls Clubs in  downtown Franklin. November the 7th, 2026. Number eight is consideration of event permit for  the rodeo parade sponsored by the Franklin Noon   Rotary Club in downtown Franklin on May the 9th.  And number nine is ordinance number 2026-01 to   correct and clarify the language in section 23-106  of the city of Franklin storm water ordinance.   Good evening everyone this has got a lot of  meat. I know. Let's have it. It really does. Slide two just Thank you. So, uh, as you may  recall, about once a year I come before you   with some mistake I found in the code. Uh, last  year was a little amusing. We had found old,   very old city court language that talked about  how the mayor could arrest people and the the   city court judge was collecting what happened to  that. We fixed that. I'm going to ask you again   to stop. Please just stop. Uh, this year is not  nearly as exciting though. I will refer to uh if   I could have the next slide. If you remember last  fall we update and we do this fairly regularly the   storm water ordinance. Um and it's a pretty bulky  document. It's about 35 40 pages long. Um going   through the city code I will tell you I found some  things that I thought needed some attention but  

not as direly as this. U issues about how to throw  snowballs with or without malice. Uh issues about   fortune tellers. Just a collection of things. Uh  this however when I came across it in the storm   water ordinance when we revised it at the end  of last year um if you can imagine a 40page docu   word document full of red lines with substantive  changes gets a little bit unwieldy around page   2830 around in there we lost a semicolon in a list  of things um I have now referred to that as the   semicolon of doom because when that semicolon came  out on a word document it looked okay the spacing   just happened to work out. So, what you saw  presented to you looked correct. When it went into   the city's website, however, that error caused  the list of things to just kind of be like they   were shaken in a box. So, they're kind of just  out of order and jumbly and messy is kind of the   short answer. So, this ordinance uh just replaces  a single semicolon, fixes grammar, and fixes the   order in which that list appears. Not nearly  as exciting as last year, I know. I will try   to find better for you next time, but I'm happy  to answer any questions you have. Wow. Grammar   matters. Grammar is important. And we have our  storm water director here. So, yes. Any thoughts,   Mr. M? Any questions? Jeff, I mainly called him  out so people would know who our storm correct. I appreciate your support, but I can tell you that  legal is not going to let it happen. Yes, I think   that would be a lot of fun. All right. Thank you  so much. All right. Thank you. Okay. We're going   on to item 10. And this is going to take a good  deal of time. I understand a lot of discussion.  

This is discussion and update on resolution  2025-26 approving a development plan for   Harland PUD subdivision with 15 modifications of  development standards, building elements, parking,   glazing, open space for the property located west  of Hillview Lane and north of Coleman Road at 1247   Hillview Lane. I will not read all the MOS's, but  I think that we're going to have staff go through   that. I think uh Joy's going to start out and then  we're going to go to uh uh the Adam Balash and   uh Greg Gamble set the plan right now and then  Emily Wright's going to come up and talk some. We're just going to have the applicant  start off and then we'll come in and   give you any final comments. Great. You  cue the presentation. Greg Gamble and   Adam Bales. I think so, Adam. That'd be helpful. Hi, board mayor and alderman. My name is Greg  Gamble and I'm representing the applicant   uh for Harland and I appreciate this time you've  set aside for us tonight to have this discussion.   Um before you is a request for annexation  and resoning and development plan approval.   The Harlem development is in the Village  Green concept overlay in Envision Franklin   and we have been able to really work hard with  staff to understand what village green is,   what it means and what a fantastic end result that  uh we can arrive at with a neighborhood in the   village green design concept. Um this property  is about 310 acres in size and uh we have set   aside 70% open space which is 217 acres. We're  proposing a total of 242 homes in this in the  

development plan which is a density of 78 homes  per acre. that does not include a approximately   50 acre property that's currently in Williamson  County that we're not proposing to annex with this   uh proposal that would include eight homes  ranging in size from on lots 5 to 8 acres in size. We are proposing um infrastructure first. We're  proposing that uh off-site roadway improvements be   done completed uh before the first building permit  and we'll talk through that in just a minute. We   are proposing a diversity of housing. We as a city  for several years have talked about the missing   middle architecture that's included as a part of  this proposal tonight as well as single family   homes. Uh this plan also includes uh 27,000 square  ft of neighborhood commercial. That's a very small   amount, but it allows for maybe a sundry shop, a  general market um and just meeting the basic needs   of residents that are within the area, creating  uh walkability uh and walkable destinations.   There is an 80 room boutique in that would  not come on until the second phase of the   development. But again to offer uh hospitality  in a very unique setting and in a very unique   way. Uh the proposal tonight uh there are no  changes to the development plan. Want to be   clear on that. What we're asking you to zone and  entitle as a part of a development plan there are   no changes. The changes that we're proposing  tonight are with the off-site roadway route,   uh, specifically the Machatcher extension and  how we're accessing Hillview Lane. This route  

aligns with the major thoroughfare  plan that was adopted in 2017. Pass that This uh road improvement on Coleman  Road will be completed with phase one prior to   the development, I'm sorry, the building permit  of any home within the neighborhood. Right now,   there's a condition of approval by staff in  condition 30, uh, which we'll also talk about   in just a minute, that states that this fair  and way must be gated until this improvement   is completed and that 50 homes could be  constructed with access to Hillview Lane.   uh while this construction is taking place,  uh we're asking you in a revised condition 30   tonight to uh flip that uh that this road  must be completed and that Hillview Lane   must be gated off while the first phase  of development is under construction. This is the intersection of Henpeek Lane and  Coleman Road. This dual signal uh resulted in the   um most favorable outcome for traffic engineers  um showing the most improved intersections with   uh levels of services A, B, and C at uh  these turning movements. Um without these   signals, this intersection um will become  significantly worse over the next few years. The proposal that we're bringing to you tonight  for the off-site road improvement is to extend   Mhatcher about twice the distance  that we were previously proposing.   Um, instead of tying to Hillview Lane just  behind Target, we're proposing to extend Hill  

uh Mhatcher Parkway all the way to Shimri, at  which point uh a new road would be constructed   from MHCer south to tie into Hillview Lane um  at more at the entrance of of Harlem. Hillview   Lane would remain untouched from that point uh  all the way south to the tractor supply. Um,   residents along Hillview would be able  to utilize Hillview as they do today,   uh, drive through the tree tunnel, uh, access,  uh, to the east. Uh, they would also have access   to the west and would be able to drive into  Harlem and drive uh, north to Masher if they   chose to take that route. This gives them two ways  in and out for what is currently a deadend road. This is the major thoroughfare plan that  was adopted in 2017. You can see the route   uh crossing Mhatcher Parkway that would connect  Hillview Lane to Shimmer that would connect to   your um fire and police training facility and  would connect to uh Shadow Green neighborhood. In the phasing of Harland, there are utilities  that must be improved. There's currently a water   line shown here in purple that runs east west that  currently crosses the Harland development. There's   also a water line that's larger that is on Coleman  Road and HB&Ts is asking us to connect those so   that we can improve the water um for the the  region uh water pressure and water distribution   for the region. That water line must be installed  on phase one. The sewer line is shown in orange  

and you can see that we've aligned that sewer line  with our proposed um Machatcher improvement with   our proposed connection uh there at uh Hillview  Lane and it is no longer proposed to go down   Hillview Lane. Um so again, we're not proposing  any uh construction any disturbance to Hillview. Can I can you hold up the board,  Adam, that um shows the uh schedule? No, not as lovely as you're going to  have some come stand closer for most   of it. There's one coming through. I've  got a handout that's coming your way. Oh, come on. I can model. Sorry, the public can't see this. Yeah, you  can turn around. You need to be up there   if you're going to talk though. Yeah,  he's not going to talk. He won't speak. It'd be handy if we had these before. I apologize,  mayor. Yeah, cuz this is so there's a handout that   you're receiving right now which is a condition a  revised condition number 30 and we're requesting   tonight that a motion be made by Bulma to  adopt this language as a replacement for what's  

currently in um the submitt package. Um, the first  is that the applicant is required to secure the   rightway needed for off-site improvements. Um,  the second is that prior to the first building   permit issued for Harland, the applicant shall  complete the proposed entry improvements at   Coleman Road and proposed improvements at Coleman  Road and Henpeek intersections at Columbia Pike.   These improvements shall be accepted by the city  and T DOT prior to opening for public use. Again,   this is about putting infrastructure improvements  in front of development. Um the third bullet point   is that the northern access from Harland  to Hillview Lane shall be temporarily gated   with an emergency gate. The emergency gate  shall be removed upon the completion of the   following improvements or is co coordinated  by the city engineer for city of Franklin.   um C attached exhibit A in development plan sheets  C4.31, 4.32 and 4.34 for reference. This is a   commitment that we have given from the beginning  that construction access will be from the south.   Um so the first condition is that the western  approach of Machatcher Parkway and Columbia   Avenue intersection is approved. We're going to  show you in a minute how that is aligned with your   uh improvements to Columbia Pike B. Two-lane road  section and 8- foot multi-use trail rural path for   Machatcher Parkway is extended to the proposed new  intersection with Shimrich and New Road. Shimik   Drive is to be extended to Machatcher Parkway  per shadow uh per Shadow Green PUD subdivision   development plan approved 2017 resol resolution  17-20 that rightway for Shimrich is already  

platted all the way to the property line of Shadow  Green and the Machatcher right ofway that new road   is extended from Hillview Lane to Machatcher  Parkway and all new improvements are accepted   by the city of Franklin and T dot as applicable.  These improvements shall be completed and accepted   by the by the city of Franklin and T do DOT  prior to the issuance of the 151st residential   building permit or prior to any certificate of  occupancy for commercial or mixeduse buildings   in phase two as shown on the development  plan sheet C6.0 or otherwise determined by   the city engineer for the city of Franklin or its  designate. Lastly, applicant shall update uh the   sheets in the development plan uh based upon this  condition of approval as coordinated with staff   uh for one stop. What we're showing here in this  timeline is that in 2026 that full year would be   for design and permitting. It's for design not  only of the development plan but construction   documents for the site. In 2027, uh, Boille  would begin the road improvements at Coleman and   Henpeek. They would begin the improvements at the  Southern Access. They would begin mass grading on   and the construction of the on-site utilities  and begin the construction of the off-site   utilities. In 2028, the first home would begin.  And um as normal in the home building industry,   it's about 50 homes per year that uh any builder  would be able to complete. So that's pretty   standard. So then in 2029, we anticipate the  first residents moving in. The second 50 homes   would be under construction. In 2030, phase one  would be completed with the last or the third   uh 50 homes under construction. You can see  down below that that we have articulated that  

Columbia Avenue is anticipated to begin  construction in 2028 and is likely to end   construction in 2030. That aligns with that 150  homes that's in this condition of approval that   um would then permit um uh the or require that the  construction of Machatcher be completed. You can   see below that uh because of the initiation of the  sewer infrastructure we that has to be started in   2027. So boil would start that at that point. The  grading and the uh work would be done to get those   utilities installed. The Machatcher extension  uh connection to Hillview Lane and Shimik Road   would then uh take place up until about 2030.  uh would be completed about the halfway point   um through 2030 and would align with the Columbia  Avenue construction. Um we believe that this is   uh a reasonable schedule. This could differ  a little bit when we're actually in the field   underway under construction uh getting the the  final permits pulled together. Um, on the third   page of this 8 1/2 by 11 handout, we are showing  you um, in orange the items that are going to be   completed first, including Coleman improvement  and the Colombia improvement. We are showing you   in green the area that would be considered phase  one. The area in blue is considered phase two.   And the green line to the top of the page  shows the improvements and connections of   Hillview Lane and and Shimrich. And  the extension of Mhatcher Parkway   uh going from the intersection uh back to Shimri.  The line shown there in purple is the portion of   Hillview Lane that would not be touched, would  be left alone and um uh left as it is today.

There are uh 15 modification of standards that  are being requested. A lot of these are design   specific to small multif family building types  to uh live work town homes and access um for   ADA accessibility. Um happy to go through those  modification of standards mayor at the appropriate   time. I think we would love to um kind of have  a discussion about what was just presented maybe   first and then we can address those modification  of standards if that's appropriate. Joey's our   modification standard person but uh we may have  some uh duplication of comments because yeah we   that's fine. Thank you mayor. Uh Adam and I are  happy to answer any questions that you may have.   We'd love to uh discuss this with you um as  uh it is a change to the off-site road plan,   but it's in response to what we've heard. It's  in response to listening to our neighbors,   listening to their concerns. uh really we  have been working uh since September to   find a solution with uh commitment um that we  can bring to you tonight that shows you that   um we have the ability to listen uh we  have the ability to bring a solution to   the table that is a a workable solution  hopefully for everyone. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I've got questions if the board's not going  to ask any. Okay. Uh and I'll let them get warmed   up. I'm sure it'll warm you up. Uh first of all,  uh the connection of Chimick to uh uh the city's   property. Uh one of the things we've heard is that  the residents of Shadow Green are concerned that   uh traffic is going to be going through  Shadow Green creating a real problem. So,  

I'd like to hear your comments on that. Uh, we  believe that the shortest route to Machatcher and   Columbia Pike is down the Machatcher extension.  Um, there are multiple turns through Shadow Green,   it seems to be a bit cumbersome to um to to to  traverse that area. I would think that if someone   lived in Harland and had a friend or a relative  in Shadow Green, that would be the fastest way   for them to go and visit that relative. Um, other  than that, uh, I really believe that the fastest   route is going to be to exit Harland, turn right  on Machatcher, and go out to the intersection. Um,   one thing to point out on Columbia Avenue once  it is under construction, uh, there's going to   be disruption between and in front of the  the Target and the uh, Chick-fil-A. Uh,   this certainly would provide an alternative route,  mayor, for uh, those residents that live in Shadow   Green to be able to get out to MHCer. uh without  having to go through the construction zone. Uh   the uh um Hill View Lane, is that a county road?  Will it still be a I think it's a county road,   isn't it? There's a portion of it that is  county. The areas that Bole is talking about   uh constructing to city of Franklin standards um  would be uh quick claim to the city of Franklin.   and the um um I had one email speaking about  400 units, but your report I think said 242.   242 in the development plan. If you add the eight  additional that are in the county, it takes you to   250. Yeah. And then would you um uh I've had some  concerns expressed about the MGID property. Okay.   which uh felt like they were being isolated and  there was concern about how they would be able to   ingress and egress or how their neighbors might  be able to reach uh her property in case there  

was some health issue. Okay. With a response from  her neighbors. Understand? Um uh Hillview Lane is   a public street. We're not proposing to gate it.  Um the new um road that we're proposing here would   basically create a four-way intersection with  the Megidd property's driveway being at the other   uh leg. So if you were to leave the Megidd  property, you could continue straight unimpeded   on Hillview Lane all the way down through the  tree tunnel to the Machatcher intersection. It   it would be unimpeded. You'd be able to  come in, drive through the tree tunnel,   uh drive all the way up Hillview Lane, uh  cross New Road and the entrance to Harland,   and drive straight into the driveway and and onto  the McGith property. Okay, I think that's all the   questions I noted so far, but I'm I may come  back and ask more. So, uh, Alderman Pototts,   um, I just had a a couple and much like the the  mayor, I may reserve, uh, to circle back. Um,   I wanted to follow up on what the mayor was just  asking about, and that is, um, the the change now,   uh, and I'm looking at I think the it's got  phase one, two, and then the unaltered section   of Hillview Lane. So that's where Hillview Lane  is in purple. Um yeah, we've got a board. Yeah,   that that's the one right there. So just for  clarification, so the Hillview Lane is not   going to be touched at this point. And I'm asking  because at one point we were going to fence it off   or block it off with, you know, whatever it needed  for pedestrians and bikes and things like that to   use. Now, we're just going to leave Hillview Lane  as it is. We're fine either way. If the residents  

say that they would prefer, the neighbors prefer  to have a gate. I think that it should be operable   for the Megidd property because that was a concern  of her. She wants to be able to use that road. I   understand that. Um, as a uh ungated road, it's  open to everyone. It is a public street. Um,   we we really don't have an opinion one way or  the other. What we're trying to do through what   we're proposing tonight is that we're staying off  Hillview Lane, right? And and I guess that's where   I was going is down there at the tractor supply  where as closest to Columbia and Macatcher. Um,   previously there was discussion about kind of  blocking that off. The alderman can approve gates,   but I don't know that we it's it's not going to  be blocked off for at at the north end I think   is what we were talking about here. Okay. And  then Adam, you want to say something? Go ahead.   Go ahead. Um, sorry. I'm Adam Balish with Boil  Investment Company. Um I think if I understand   your question correctly, Alderman Pototts, the  um right now the originally there was proposal to   um close off and turn call it the tree tunnel  into a walking trail. Right now in working   through with engineering staff, they believe  they can keep that um intersection with um um   Hillview Lane near Tractor Supply is a functional  open intersection. So that would be fully open to   traffic, pedestrians, whomever that would want  to use caught the tree tunnel portion. And we're   not suggesting that that change in any way from  what it is today other than it be a cleaner, more   um possibly um efficient intersection compared  to the fact that you just kind of veer off   um from that right now at the target entrance, if  that makes sense. But that we're not proposing any   um any changes that would impede traffic or  or cut track traffic off of that entrance.   And y'all referenced the 2017 um sorry I  believe it was the roadway plan um shimmer  

2017 major thoroughare plan. So you're following  the blueprint of what was the 2017 major thorough   excuse me thorough affair plan roughly the if you  were to zoom in on this exhibit that was created   by city staff and their consultants this was not  created by by boil you would find that the the   yellow dash line that is south of Matcher Parkway  goes through um the Dodson's property Mr. Dodson   is is here tonight. Um I think this ex um exhibit  was created, you know, maybe without their input   10 years ago or whenever. I'm not sure they even  live there then. Um the only shift in this that we   are proposing is that the yellow line south of Mac  Hatcher be shifted somewhat west to not impact the   Datson property um through here. Um but generally  it would follow the same the same alignment.   Uh Greg mentioned earlier that Chimmerick from  Shadow Green to Mac Hatcher rightway was already   uh platted. In addition to that being platted,  it's already constructed minus the asphalt paving,   the base stone, the storm and the gutters  um are are in place with this anticipation   um of a future connection. Um we personally  um think that this much like this um Columbia   Avenue local network plan suggests um me and my  family live off of Columbia Avenue on a street   called Adam Street. So, we travel this road daily.  Um, and we recognize the benefits that the street   element um for the Columbia Avenue local network  plan would create in the fact that, you know,   when Columbia Avenue is congested or when it's  under construction that there are alternative   paths suggested through this yellow network.  This was created by staff and public input a   decade ago almost for that exact reason. And um  we've been asked by staff in our presentation when   we presented call it the new road that connected  to um um Machatcher is for us to go ahead and and  

pave the rest of that and make that uh connection.  So we have agreed to that. the the terms that are   presented to you all in the um work session from  staff are making that recommendation and we're   agreeing with that recommendation to pave that  connection and and and uh finish off those dashed   yellow lines there if that makes sense. I just got  one other question. I may I may circle back here,   but regarding that uh uh following that MHatcher  extension up to Shurmer. Um you just mentioned   connectivity. Uh will there be any type of  sidewalk and I'm sorry I can't zoom in here,   but if you could just speak to that and then  also any additional connectivity regarding   multi-use path, things like that. Yes, sir.  the um the road cross-section that is in the   actual technical documents of the development  plan call for a two-lane road with an 8-foot   um call it bike trail multi-use path adjacent to  the road. So um the entirety of this call it new   road going up to Mhatcher and then from that new  road at Mac Hatcher all the way east to Columbia   would have the um the bike trail um included as  part of that. And then there would be connect   pedestrian connections made to um um the Target  shopping center as well as to towards Winstead   uh Hill to the south to access the city park. So,  we would um make sure to follow up with that and   that is in the development plan now for that  approved road section. And are there sidewalk?   I'm sorry. Go ahead. The the road section is  in the development plan showing that is I was   trying to say just lastly on the connectivity on  the Shimmerick piece on that connection that's   going to go up into the the west side going  northbound on uh Shimmer. Is there sidewalk   connectivity there as well? Um I honestly don't  know the answer to that. I would guess they are   following street city standards and that there  would be sidewalks along that. I'm not sure if  

that's constructed now, but if we're finishing  that road up, we would follow city standards and   and pave a sidewalk in addition to the road  through that process. Okay. Thank you, sir. Vice Mayor, go ahead. Um, thank you uh for for  doing this this or for coming up with this. U   couple things when last fall top concerns was  preserving from residents preserving Hilly   Lane. Um and and I empathize because the second  iteration that you all came back with, while I   think it was better and it removed the sidewalk  from Hillview Lane, it also it it there was going   to still be impact. And so I think the public  needs to know that there was significant shift in   accommodating what you all heard and what we all  expressed uh to protecting Hillview Lane. There's   still Facebook groups and stuff out there with the  picture of the tree tunnel saying this is going to   get destroyed. It's just not true. Never has been.  and we're having to deal with misinformation out   there because you're putting up the tree tunnel  saying it's going to be destroyed and we're trying   to bring solutions here to actually achieve  saving a heritage road. So, I appreciate the   residents who have been cooperative in in in in  engaging in this process because it has actually   led to solutions. One of which is achieving our  our road network plan. That was 2017, no relation   to Harlem. We know there needs to be connectivity  here and we're doing it uh you know without   impacting an actual home uh or having to displace  a home when the T dot came through and did it in  

the future and had if they follow the yellow line.  Couple things to traffic and infrastructure. This   is a shift too which when we had elections last  year and infrastructure before development you   this is a this is a shift from what it was the  last time the public heard this. It is actually   fixing a level F intersection on Colombia Avenue  at Himp and Coleman. Level Failing. It's funny.   Some of the same people who are against this like  to bring up level F intersections in other parts   of the community, but somehow silent on this level  F that's going to a level A and a level C and a B.   Actually, two A's, one B and a C. So, we actually  changed something here. And then not only that,   phasing it so that Colombia Avenue, we heard don't  do it until Col, the infrastructure is there.   Columbia Avenue. You don't want to build 200 homes  before Columbia Avenue is done. How can we do   that? Phasing. What you're doing here? So, you're  showing a phase construction here. Interesting bit   of information and then I'll get to my question.  Uh, is that for 50 homes is equivalent to about   the traffic of I believe this came from a traffic  engineer that you all have that I requested this   information because I'm curious. Chipotle opened  up. 100 homes. Uh, that's 50 homes. Equivalent   traffic. The equivalent traffic of Chipotle impact  on Colombia is 50 homes. Chipotle and Waterburg.   It's 50 homes. Waterburg is about to open up.  It's another 50 home traffic equivalent. That's   not hearsay. That is in our traffic study. what  we use traffic counts in our impact fees. That's  

the equivalent cuz we we calculate based off  the number of trips. So, just try to get some   facts out here cuz it's it's getting tiring to  hear all the I got someone told me there were   400 homes today. Mayor, someone told me today that  construction was going to be coming through Shadow   Green, all the construction trucks. Is that going  to happen? No, sir. Is it are you bound by the   conditions of approval that if that were to happen  they'd pro we'd shut the project down because   didn't you designate that as a construction  entrance in the understanding the modifications?   We have and I believe BNS has the and maybe  Mr. Marsh could speak to this but I believe   have to add to make that happen has the ability  to stop permits um stop permits. So there's all   this information out there that is just is highly  frustrating. So I'm glad we're getting some of   that clear. The last thing is high density and  and you know there's no way that someone with   a sincere desire for the truth would consider  this high density if you're being honest with   yourself and you look at yourself in the mirror  and you can sleep good at night 7 houses per acre. You know, we are striving for that kind of density  in most of the community because the land prices   are pushing it higher. We'd love it if every  development came before us with.7 houses per acre   cuz guess what? We'd have a 70%. Anyway, I got to  get to my questions. Um, gate on Hillview Lane.   I want to ask uh staff if we wanted to put a gate  onto Hillview Lane at the intersection of Chimick   and Hillview Lane. What would need to be done to  do that? What's the purpose of that? Now, this   purpose of this gate would be and I would want  to hear from uh I've talked to some residents.  

We would want to hear from others um to to prevent  flow through traffic possible flow. I don't know   why people would do it, but if they did at the end  there and allowing uh the Megidd property entrance   and egress back through that gate so that so that  truly it cuts off Hillview Lane at that new road.   In terms of procedure, you would just need to  um once you're considering the development plan   and there's a motion on the floor, you would make  an amendment to add a condition of approval that   there be a gate in the location where you'd like  it to be. I would defer to Paul and any specifics   related to any necessary turnaround or anything  like that, but terms of procedure, you're able   to amend to add a condition of approval. Okay. Um,  couple of other How much uh to the applicant, how   much an in off-site infrastructure that wouldn't  be done that's not currently on the county's plan   for road infrastructure. So, basically Coleman  Road, Henpek Lane in the county or T dot. They're   not planning on doing this. T DOT's not planning  on doing the Macatcher and Columbia Avenue   intersection. How much money are you spending over  and above what we're requiring to improve these   things that will not be done in seven to 10 years  if this doesn't happen? It's not going to happen   unless the county commission gets a bug and they  decide to fund this which I don't believe that   will happen. Sure. Um so right now I'm going  to um answer that as specifically as I can.   We don't have in front of me the numbers broken  down specifically for that. the the Coleman Road,   Henpeek, Columbia intersection plus our proposed  improvements to uh the western leg of MHatcher  

intersection. So, not the Machatcher extension  beyond tractor supply, but just improving that   intersection. Um, and this is spelled out in the  road impact fee agreement that will be before you   this evening if you really want to get into the  minutia. Um, but we are spending approximately   $12 million in off-site roadway improvements.  Our project is generating roughly $4 million in   impact fee impact. This is almost tripling um the  um associated traffic trips that staff and others   have generated for the nexus, the the causation  of the linkage between traffic and the cost. We're   going almost triple to to what's doing that. So,  we are proposing to spend approximately $8 million   above and beyond any recapture or impact fees that  we're generating um mainly for a intersection that   has been on the major thoroughfare plan for the  county for over a decade. So, let me ask you this   because I'm I'm not always great with math on the  fly, but I think we increased our road impact fees   by 3 400%. You're paying the new road impact fees,  right? Yes. Yes, sir. So, what you're telling me   is that we increased our road impact fees by  3 or 400%. And you're paying triple of those   impact fees to make improvements. The what we have  said is the impact of traffic on this development.   You're paying triple of that. Um I don't think  any of us took lightly approving those increased   impact fees and how that would affect development.  And um I think we all know how gratuitous those   impact fees were to the citizenry in paying for  roads when we did it because we're raising them   so high so we can pay for infrastructure and  we have someone paying three times. The last  

thing is for staff. What legal requirements do we  have in noticing off-site improvements? If well   well let me ask you this. Has the development  plan changed at all? meaning the entitlements,   the plan as it is laid out, the number of units,  traffic impact analysis. There's not a new one of   those. I would guess uh is anything on that you  presented to the community in the first public   meeting as far as the uses the use the zoning  change and development plan has that changed? No, the development plan has not changed and the  zoning request has not changed. the offsite road   this then now my question is for staff if and I'd  like for some examples and maybe you can get it to   us before the next meeting. I'd like to know when  we have noticed and have we noticed every single   off-site improvement that has changed in between  a public meeting where a development plan was   presented and a voting meeting when the off-site  improvements changed. I can't speak to that in all   of our history of development plans, but didn't  mean like I mean Yes. I mean, when a development   plan moves forward, we have a very transparent  process for a reason. We pride ourselves in that   and we require a public meeting neighbor with  the neighbors prior to any submitt. And that is   when we expect any any ways that neighbors may be  impacted to be presented at that meeting. And then   it moves on to the planning commission meeting.  There is a chance for public comment there. We   have been through a very lengthy process with this  particular development. And um staff has not even  

fully reviewed on our departmental team level  these changes that you're seeing. And you can   I'm sure you were going to get to that a little  bit later in the in the evening. So you don't have   to you don't have to give us I don't know all  of the history of every development plan, but   we typically do make sure that all materials are  publicly noticed well in advance of the meeting   and that they are available for public to view.  Um as with this plan, that was done. Um, however,   there are changes to off-site improvements that  are shown as part of the development plan sheets   that have been included all throughout the  submittal process. No, I don't want us to get   hung up on that at this moment. I feel like we're  going to have a little a reprise of that a little   bit later, but those are all the questions I had.  Okay. All right. Who else wants to speak? Alman   Bland. Um, thank you for your passion, Patrick.  Um I am very grateful that um while this change is   new and I and a lot of us have heard from people  like it's great but we hadn't had time to digest   it. I'm very grateful that you heard the please  of the biggest hurdle for this community and   the residents along Hillview Lane that this road  is important and it's important that it doesn't   change. um in meeting with you all outside of this  room about this change. One of the things that   was discussed um the McGidd property has come up  there's if you are say you're going down um what   is now known as Hillview Lane which will later  be MHCatcher to the public. If somebody starts   traversing down Hillview Lane, they get to the  new road, there's no place for them to turn around   like there used to be in front of the Harland  driveway. And we had talked about somehow possibly   adding some way for people to get out because if  there is a gate um no matter which side of that  

new road that would make things difficult. Um I do  feel like um I had jokingly said, "Can we have a   tunnel under this road so Miss McID could get to  her house?" Um, I know that's probably not I mean   that's let's make it happen, but it seems like um  the last parcel property at the end of this road   um now negating the Harland property um she's  the most affected by this and I would love us   to continue to work on um the best way to figure  that out. Um, the other things, the questions that   I had have been answered. So, for the people at  Shadow Green, which I know how it is. I've sat   in the seat long enough. People want their view  sheds to stay where they bought it in perpetuity.   It is not realistic and it's unfortunate unless  you want to buy that viewshed or that view out   your window. If Shimmerick was always supposed  to eventually connect with Mac Hatcher, this   is just expediting the process. So, I apologize  for people who are used to a certain, you know,   life experience, but unless you own it, it's not  nothing is for sure. And I have said this to many   people throughout my tenure. I look out my kitchen  window at the Drury Inn and Friday night lights   from Centennial High School. It has become my  normal. it was part of, you know, it's just what   happens. So again, thank you for hearing. I think  for me the biggest hurdle has been somewhat dissu continues to go all the way that we need it to  so everyone um is what they've been fighting for   is addressed. If I may respond to that question  or comment really quickly, um is work session.  

Um Patrick Patrick made a similar comment about  what if there were a gate. Um we've had where is   the gate? We've had detailed conversations with  Paul and Jimmy and the engineering staff about   what that could look like. Um it's hard to depict  here um on the on the screen. Um but it would yeah   be would it be two gates generally? You know  right there it would not be two gates. would   be well depending on the width but it would most  likely be a singular gate that spans the two lanes   of the road but um again that is not something  that boil is proposing as the applicant we would   be happy to construct that if that was something  that Bulma wished to impose on the conditions in   the conversations that we've had with engineering  and and Paul can correct me if I may speak here is   that um we would suggest that that modification  be made to add a gate with language that says it   shall meet engineering and fire regulations.  Um the turnaround ability um at the end of   that lane would be important if that does become  gated. Um if there is no gate there at the kind   of the intersection where where Greg is pointing  out, then there is no turnaround option because a   driver could go left or right. Um although we are  not proposing to touch the majority of Hillview   Lane through this process, I do want to point out  that I think you know kind of somewhat tragic that   we've all been dealing with for the last month or  two is the ice storm uh ramifications. Uh we had a   tree fall in our house and they just now picked  up the logs today. So we're excited to get that   cleaned up. But um Hillview Lane was unpassable  during that during that storm. And due to some   of the farmers that um um maintained that those  properties, um some of them are city employees,   but they were doing it in their on their own time.  Um that road was that road was impassible. And so,   you know, having the opportunity, should there  have been a medical emergency during that time  

to have a a you know, resource valve on  call it the west side of this, you know,   could be a critical uh improvement in the future.  Um, should heaven forbid we have a condition like   that again. But we would be happy to work  with staff if that was something that Bulma   deemed important to you all tonight uh to work  through those gating ramifications uh on there. Mayor Alen Barnhill put when we were listening  or when I was listening to all the comments   being made uh the vice mayor made a comment  about the impact fees being increased by 300%.   and explain that to me because we we grandfathered  and uh and whatever on the rates is when they came   in. So you're not paying what the actual fee was  or is that we went to because of the fact that   phasing in and grandfathering would have made it  such that nobody's paying the full amount probably   eight or 10 years. This would not be subject to  the grandfather grandfather. This would not be   subject. No. Uh it would be phased in over the  end. It would be period. Yes, that's right. But   the Sorry. No, you're fine. So just to clarify,  the 300% I think was referenced maybe twice. There   was a reference to the fact that old impact fees  went up several hundred%. But in our case, our   proposed improvements that we are making offsite,  unrelated to what you all did with impact fees, we   are spending approximately $12 million to impacts  that we are generating of around4 $4 million. So   there was a 300% reference there. I just wanted to  make sure that wasn't confused with the increase   in impact fees. So yeah. And let can I may I  clarify that we looked at the total increase in  

impact fees. There was a six-year I believe phase  in so we're probably by 20. But here's what when   you get this timeline out here and the impact  fees are paid when the permits are pulled. So   everything you know every year that if it is if  it is phased in. So I appreciate that correction   and I don't know that it is exactly that but it is  three times that has been a new process that that   primarily Jimmy Wiseman and the applicants have  been getting used to. Um as we look at projects   we're basically picking what we think is a middle  point on that on that phased in diagram of road   impact fees. So if it goes from 2028 to 2034 we're  kind of saying hey we think this is averaging out   at around 2030 and we're picking those fees. if  for some reason there's a market delay and you   know we're pulling more permits in 2032, we're  paying more money. Um and so right now what is   in front of you or will be later tonight on the  road impact fee is kind of a uh best guesstimate   and kind of averaging those numbers across that  timeline because we're not pulling them all at   one time like you would if it were apartments  or an office building or something like that. Alvin Caesar. Appreciate that, Mayor. And I  would echo Bry's comments that this has certainly   evolved as as this project has come forward. I  know there's still a lot of folks in the audience   out there that aren't happy about the project,  but one thing I can say is that you guys have   done a good job of listening and trying to put  together a good proposal for where we are today.   And while Alderman Blandon and Alderman Bagot  have talked about the most important thing was   saving Hillview Lane, I'm not going to contest  that. But I'm not going to say that was the   only important thing to me because I happen  to live off of Mac Hatcher in this area and   because sometimes I get stuck between the hours  of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Driving on Macatcher,  

I am personally exposed to the traffic.  And you can say maybe it's because of the   Chipotle opening, but it's it's probably  because that road Machatcher and Columbia   Avenue need to be improved. And I think this  is aspirational. And I would ask staff if they   feel like Columbia Avenue construction will be  complete and that road will be open by 2030. By 2030, it should be well underway. I don't  know that it's going to be I don't know that   it's I don't know that it's going to be  complete. Sure. We have two more years   probably of rightaway acquisition and then  it'll be about a three-year construction   project. Uh that's what we're planning  right now. And Paul, but the initial phases,   as the applicant stated, aren't building  Macatcher, they're coming off Coleman Road.   Correct. They're not terminating that direction  and I understand that. Um phase the first 50,   when are you planning to open up the gate to push  people north or to allow people to traverse north?   At what phase on the the timeline here, Greg?  Um it's shown here um at about halfway between   um uh maybe I don't know I'll say summer of  2030 when this this bottom line down here   the Mac Hatcher extension we cannot take the gate  off of Hillview and let uh vehicles use it until   that Machatcher extension is finished completed  approved and that could happen before Colombia is   complete it it good. It probably will. And I don't  want to take anything away from you, Paul. I know   your team is full of professionals and there's a  lot that's going into this. Um I too was on the   campaign trail almost 3 years ago. And we thought  Colombia would be finished in three or four years  

at that point. That's what I was told by staff  at the time. 18 months to 24 months for rightway   acquisition and then a two to threeyear buildout.  We would be done in the next 3 to four years. And   we we haven't. And I don't think that's anybody's  fault. There's a lot of moving pieces there. Um,   in addition to one note to point out, uh, under  the third bullet point, A, it says the western   approach of Macatcher Parkway and Columbia Avenue  intersection is improved. Yeah, I saw that on that   is a requirement. So, we know that there are  certain things that have to fall into place. I   and I get that. And I think that that intersection  will be improved because you'll be in control of   that intersection. It'll move more. It's part  of the Columbia Avenue plans. And so there's   nuance here, but does a mean that Columbia Avenue  and the Columbia intersection will be improved? All all right. This is just the western leg because there  would be city. Yeah. I mean, if the city's not   finished with Columbia Avenue, I'm not sure what  there is to tie into. Um, but as Paul stated, we   have here the first two years, 26, 27 for rightway  acquisition, three years of construction. So,   I we believe is our best guess that we're in line  with where we think we should be. Yeah, Paul wants   to add something. Yeah. And if they're required  to have the western leg done, they can certainly   have it done. And then we just stripe it to the  way that when we get with Columbia Avenue that   we can then mill and the western macad leg, that  western macadatcher leg. I would hate to tie any   development up to a federally funded project just  given the constraints that we have to jump through   and the hoops that pop up throughout the life of  those jobs. Um, an example is we've already had to  

um, do the environmental document twice. They're  going to make us do it a third and a fourth time.   And we are at the mercy of T DOT and federal  highways every time they do that. But we do   feel two more years of rightaway acquisition and  then move into construction um, for a three-year   project. Did you say that environmental is going  to have to be done a third time? I'm concerned   it's going to have to be done a third time. I'm  concerned, it might have to be done a fourth time,   and there's really no reason for it. And that's  why, again, federal projects are very difficult,   and I'd hate to tie any development to a fedally  funded project. I think I think you're making my   point here for the folks that live in that area.  There's still so much unknown on Columbia Avenue.   And I'm not even going to get to talk about  Macatcher and the potential for Machatcher to   be expanded. I like where I think this project is  going. Um, and I've I've I've stayed this course,   I think, the whole time. And that doesn't mean  I'm not open to changing because quite candidly   extending Mhatcher preserves Hillview Lane, gives  the folks who are going to be in the Harland   development a better in in and out. I would  argue that for the Shadow Green folks, the ones   that back up to Macatcher, it probably disrupts  your viewshed, but it also gives you a second   way to get out and not to have to fight with  Chick-fil-A traffic. And there's there are some   good correlations here with what folks want. maybe  not the ones that want to see a green pasture, but   there are some positive aspects of this. I can't  get over the fact that Colombia Avenue currently   is a problem. And second to Columbia Avenue, I I  I had a meeting this morning with some folks and   it took me 13 minutes to get from the Macatcher  Columbia intersection to Figning Goat Coffee,   which is where I am most mornings. if you want to  find me 13 minutes to travel about a mile and a   half and that's not going to get better in the  next 5 years. It's just not I' I'd be open to  

exploring roundabouts, but it may delay it even  further. At least we could put a roundabout at   Downs. But let me ask just one final question or  maybe one or two more questions. Paul, Royal Oaks,   we talked about improving the Royal Oaks MHasher  intersection and we did that for a reason. Has   work on that intersection begun in a material way?  So, Royal Oaks and Mack Hatcher, uh, the design   is actually 100% complete. We have one track for  rightway acquisition. T Dot is paving this summer   and we anticipate starting construction  on the side road. Zero federal funding,   zero utility relocation. That project will move  very fast. Do we have an expected when that might   be finished? But the first of the year is my goal.  by before paving season ends. So, November time   frame is my deadline to try to get that done. You  don't think you can trick him into doing the whole   rest of Match? I'm going to try, but doubtful.  In that same speed. I I I like where this is   going in in most directions. I've got to have more  confidence on Columbia Avenue and I've got to have   more confidence on Mac Hatcher actually coming out  because like you said, as much as we want these   projects to move forward, we're somewhat at the  mercy. And I I can't look the constituents that   live in the southeast quadrant in the eyes and say  that we are anticipating improving the congestion   before it gets worse if we put more projects  or more more roads over there. And then and   then the final piece, and this is a sidebar, and  nobody's going to agree with me probably, but I   really don't like the offset traffic intersection  at Henpeek. And and I know the engineers say it   works, but man, I just I wish someone would teach  me. Maybe Bev's saying roundabout over there. I   think she's not wrong. Maybe someone would teach  me how that offset's not going to create unusual   stacking and I could be more supportive of it.  But it it it it feels like if we're going to   fix a lot, and I know that we're asking a lot of  boil here. It feels like we're going to fix a lot.  

Let's not make that first entrance be disjointed  the way that it is today. I believe this is our   fifth public meeting. Um at the previous four  public meetings, we've talked agnosium about   that intersection. Roundabouts and the singular  intersection both fail at full buildout. I hear   that. That was that was a direction from the  county engineering department that they've said,   "Hey guys, Franklin, you need to take a look at  this." um the Franklin engineering department,   the third party engineering department that um  is engaged to review these as well as our traffic   engineer all collaborated what the um county staff  and engineering was saying within the professional   recommendation from five different traffic  engineers to say this is the most effective   proposed um recommendation for improvement there.  And then one other thing with regard to traffic   that I just want to reiterate that we talked about  um in this this broad scheduling. We are in the   first quarter of 2026. Um to reiterate what we  were talking about from a scheduling cycle here.   We are not proposing um based on what we think the  market um will absorb as well as the timeline that   we know it takes to get through Franklin projects  residents moving in until approximately 2029.   We believe there's about a 50 unit absorption on  an annual basis. That's not 50 people moving in on   January 1st. That's 50 homes over the course  of a year, right? That is the equivalent, as   um Patrick said earlier, of a singular fast  food chain on Columbia Avenue. In addition to us   um talking about the timing, we are going to  make improvements to intersections right now   that left un untouched at Columbia and Hinnpek  have a half a mile backup in 32 32. Um so we   understand that there are additional trips  that are being generated from our project.  

We don't believe that in the course of 29 and 30  that is literally the equivalent of a Chipotle   opening up in 29 and a water burger opening up in  2030. Um before then we are taking intersections   that are currently failing and have been  failing for quite some time. We've seen posts on   uh various apps and things like that referencing  flashing lights and things like that. There have   been deaths at this intersection. Uh, Mayor  Anderson commented that this has been on their   docket for over a decade, including NPOS's. Um,  so we are um about as excited as one could be to   take on infrastructure improvements for an area  that we think we can have a meaningful impact   uh even though we are adding trips to the overall  uh road network over time. Sir, I appreciate the   additional context. I was in all those meetings.  I've heard the conversations. I just asked for   somebody to explain it to me in a logical way  because all the models may say what they want   to say, but everybody in this room's probably sat  at a split intersection and been frustrated when   the light turns green and when the light turns  red and we're allowing folks through. Our traffic   engineer is here tonight and she was a part of the  meetings with the other four traffic engineering   firms. Would that be helpful? Yeah, sure. Help  me understand the flow and how that would help. Put her on the spot. Hi, uh Amy Burch, Birch Transportation, uh  here on behalf of the uh development team.   And yes, we did study several different um uh  configurations for those intersections and also   taking into consideration, you know, rightway and  so forth. But the analysis did show that we could   coordinate these two signals and um allow traffic  to flow between them. And I I know it doesn't   make sense. I really can't uh explain it as as  well as you probably want to want to hear it,  

but we did work with your uh city's uh traffic  engineers on reviewing that analysis to show   um that that that would work. One of the issues  with what we we did study a um option of like a   what's sort of like a peanut uh roundabout um and  found that the southbound traffic volumes on um   on uh Colombia was going to uh cause issues on the  approaches uh not being able to enter that flow of   traffic. So, um, the two signals allows that, um,  uh, ability to stop traffic on Columbia Pike for   brief times to let the traffic on, uh, Coleman and  Hemp out. Um, but we did we did study multiple as   well as a single intersection realigning and all  of that. um and also determined that uh you know   there's fewer uh conflict points at uh these two  intersections as opposed to a single intersection   with the left turns and so forth. So um I can  uh I don't we didn't put all of that analysis   in this report that I brought with me, but we did  study it at length with um the engineering staff   and their third party reviewer to come up with  the best solution. I think one of the things,   Alderman Caesar, is if you're traveling southbound  on Columbia Avenue, you're going to come to a red   light stop. If you're traveling northbound on  Columbia Avenue, you're going to come to a red   light stop at the same time. So, those two  movements stop. Then you're going to get a   green northbound um turn arrow from Coleman Road  that's going to allow you to stack into the void   that's between those two lights. Same on Henpe.  You're going to get a leftbound green turn signal   that's going to allow you to stack in those voids  and then it becomes green again for all traffic  

to move north south. Very good, Greg. Is that  helpful? Yeah. Essentially, you're creating an   intersection with a with a stacking pace in space  in the middle. Um, yeah, right. As long as the   stacking is sufficient, I suppose that could work.  If it's an F and you've got stacking that's over   a almost a mile long currently, I'm guessing that  space between Henpeek and Coleman's not close to   a mile. Um, but I don't know that we're going to  get to the bottom of that tonight, which is maybe   why later I'll ask for more time. Yeah. The other  thing I would reiterate is it has been through   five traffic engineers. The other reason we were  accepting of the offset was to avoid the full   acquisition. I mean full acquisition of four to  five tracks. One, it's extremely expensive. Two,   it's very very disruptive to property owners.  And when they showed that this could work,   it made it next to impossible for me to say no,  go buy those properties because I just I just   didn't think that was the right thing to do at at  this point. realigning them may be needed in the   long-term future, but at this point, the rightway  acquisition was what really drove staff to accept   this offset. Appreciate that. Hopefully  that helps. Thank you, Alderman Brown. I   won't repeat all the great comments. Thank you for  clarifying misinformation and certainly getting um   the improvements out there. I the only thing I was  going to add but then um you actually just said it   again which is relative to the the improvements  they're going to the issues already exist not   going to be improved without this we talked about  this months ago even doesn't get improved matcher   Columbia doesn't get improved and in fact I think  actually attacking Mhatcher the way that you are   and actually extending Machatcher I think doing  that improvement at Columbia Mhatcher actually   pushes is and makes our opportunity on that  southeast extension better. I think it actually  

says to T DOT, hey, look, we're not only putting  money on the table, but we're actually building an   intersection here. We're actually doing work.  I think it actually moves things forward. I   think it actually pushes them forward. Saying not  doing that improvement is just one more hurdle,   one more investment, one more thing that they've  got to do. I think it I think it actually could   help advance the projects. But the reality is  none of those improvements get made. None of   that on Coleman. None of that happens. All that  development down south, Thompson Station, it's   all coming up. It's all going back south. We're  already dealing with all of that. And none of   that gets fixed without this happening. Um because  the county has had this on their docket for over a   decade and they've not touched it. And they're  not going to. And so the one thing that this   does now having solved Hillview, now having solved  infrastructure before occupancy, now having solved   for uh one of the best densities that we could  ever ask, I don't think we've had this kind of a   density in a decade, I don't think. Um this solves  a lot of challenges and we get infrastructure   built that we actually need that no one else is  going to build. It it it's um Yeah. Thank you, Alman Burger. Um, I I love this. It's a lot  of great conversation here and a lot to think   about. I think everybody's been adding  some really unique points here tonight   and it's it's very helpful to hear that.  It's helpful to hear from you all. Um, I I will still say, and this is I guess I know  people are getting tired of hearing it from me,   but I don't really care because if we're going  to look at the future, we've got to get out of   this old school mentality of signalizing every  darn intersection. We're killing ourselves.   Tennessee is in the dark ages when it comes  to not being able to think outside the box.  

Look at these other developments. Look at I mean,  look at these other cities and communities that   do roundabouts and do them extremely well  in America, outside of America. They don't   continue to do them if they're not working. And  and one of the things I continuously hear about,   uh, well, if we think the roundabout's going to  fail, I will guarantee you the signalization of   a intersection is going to fail even worse cuz  most of the day you're going to move traffic, move   traffic. There are going to be certain times of  the day that everything is going to bottleneck and   you're still going to move traffic in a roundabout  in a signal. You're never going to do that. You're   gonna sit there for one to two minutes, whatever  it's going to be. Um, but we talk about these,   you know, I talked about before about metering  roundabouts. Metering is not a design element.   It's not a design element at all. It's an  operational tool that you put at a roundabout   when the time comes, when it's necessary, when  it's needed. I was over in Ireland. I went through   one that was signalized. It worked like a charm  because everybody piled up in one direction and   people could not get into the roundabout and dog  on it that light came on. It was sitting there for   maybe 30 seconds, 40 seconds at the most. People  were just going through and then the light changed   and people kept going and traffic kept going. They  weren't sitting there idling. They weren't sitting   there causing pollution. They weren't sitting  there wasting gas. We're in the dark ages,   guys. We're just in the dark ages. Anyway, I think  there's a lot of good comments here tonight. I   think uh a lot of good work was put into this that  I think was really needed. I think there's still   some concerns about how do we do this gate? What  do we do? Do we put up a gate? I think Patrick,   you brought that up. How did the Miged property  access this? When you come out of Medd's driveway  

and take a right, that's where that gate would  be down at the south point of that. Is that what   we're talking about? One of them. Just one  of Well, there's only one straight. Yeah. And that right there. Right there on the  eastern side of New Road across from our   truck. That's Mayor. Yeah. Will you show us  where the the emergency access gate will be?   That's the gate I was gate. The emergency  access gate is there. That's the property   line. That's what's tied to the see the little  shaking right there. Yeah. Yeah. That would be   the emergency gate on the Harland property  that would prevent any kind of construction   traffic or that's there till 2030. Then the  other gate was shaken around where it was   supposed to. Yeah. Could be there if the  alderman can talk. Yeah. We need we need   some input on that too. I'd like to move on to  staff. staff needs to come on up. And Emily, are you going to talk about the MOS's? No, I am  not. Joey is your MOS guy, as you referred to.   We're excited that you're going to do them rather  than Emily. Okay. Yes, he does them very well. Um,   I did want to talk a little bit about this handout  that's in front of you. So, staff does and always   has recommended approval with conditions of this  plan. It is in alignment with Envision Franklin.   It meets Village Green in a wonderful way. We've  always been very supportive of the design of   the plan itself. Um the four Harlem items that  are owned tonight's agenda are the annexation,   plan of service, the zoning, and the development  plan. The plan of services and development plan   have a single reading tonight. And then it would  be the second of three readings for the annexation  

and plan of services. Normally the third readings  for the annexation um sorry I think I me I meant   the annexation and the zoning not the plan of  services. I apologize but normally the third   readings for the annexation and zoning would occur  on April 14th if you move them through all these   items through tonight. staff has received these  documents of the proposal that the applicant just   reviewed with you. Uh we received it a few days  before agenda packets went out. Um engineering   has reviewed it. Um they are supportive of the  changes that have been presented to you. It has   not been through our full departmental review  team, but engineering has reviewed it. They are   the prime group that would make recommendations on  any traffic improvements and they are supportive   of th this proposal. But because there has not  really been a lot of attention publicly to the   new information, staff strongly believes  that we really should hold another public   hearing where this information has been presented  tonight and the public has a chance to respond.   Um, we have looked at the schedule and we believe  that you could vote on the two items that have   second readings tonight and hold another public  hearing at third reading on April 28th, which   would be the earliest we could publish publish  notice for another public hearing. and that the   um single reading items, the plan of service  and development plan could also have a another   public hearing and final vote all on that April  28th date. I understand this may not be what you  

all want to do. This is a staff recommendation.  Um in addition, because the Ingram property is   on tonight's Bulma agenda and that would make  the Harlem property contiguous. Now, there are   some additional amendments that would need to be  made on the floor tonight related to the plan of   services and the annexation resolutions. So  this document that I have handed out to you   goes through the amendments that would also need  to be mated to remove references to non-ontiguous   property um references to the required interlocal  agreement with the county things like that. So I'm   not going to go through each one of these unless  you want me to. Um, but these motions are all   necessary to make those amendments. And then if  you agree with the timing that I've discussed,   I've also laid that out for you. And then finally  on the development plan itself um in addition to   the plan of service and annexation any amendments  you can make tonight really help us because those   amendments have to go back to planning commission  for concurrence. That next planning commission   falls before April 28th. So we could place this  back on planning commission before it comes back   to you on April 28th. Everything could be wrapped  up. Um so just keep that in mind. Um otherwise we   would have to move the concurrence vote till  after your third reading whenever whichever   day you choose that to be. the modifications and  standards. If you want us if you want to vote on   those tonight and you want us to review those,  we'd really like that feedback from you. It does  

take Joey a little time to go through all those  15 modifications of standards. And as I said,   getting these amendments out of the way  tonight, I I think is beneficial for staff. Um,   but if you do wish to put those off to another  date, we'd love to know that before Joey goes   through all 15. Um, however, he is prepared to  do so and we if if you're ready to vote tonight,   we'd be happy to go through them all or we'll  go through them multiple nights. Happy to do   it either way. Just wanted to give you a heads up  about it. So, clarify because it may be a rail. Go   ahead. So, you're saying I'm trying to if we  postpone this, if we defer it to April 20th, we're deferring it. We're not adding a second  public hearing. you would be adding a another   public hearing, but it would all line up where the  third reading of of the zoning and the annexation,   those need three readings. So, they would  normally happen on April 14th if you just   approved move to approve everything tonight.  However, if you wanted to allow another public   hearing as staff is recommending for the public  to respond to the new information that's been   discussed tonight. Then we can hold this until  April 28th. You could hold it till April 28th   and we could That's what I was trying to figure  out. You would hold some of them but not all.   Thank you, Walter. those that are on for second  reading you would go ahead and vote on and then   those who that only need one reading you would  defer to the 28th. So if you for instance yes  

um with item number six the plan of services that  only has one um only has one reading. So you could   uh do the first recommended motion which would be  motion to approve the resolution for the plan of   services. Then do the second recommended motion  which is to amend the resolution in reference   to some of the non-ontiguous and interlocal  agreement stuff and then you could make a motion   to defer to the April 28th Bulma meeting with  another public hearing to be held at that time.   So for that particular thing, you would actually  end up deferring it to hold another public   hearing. But then if you go to the next item  number seven, you would be actually approving   on second reading tonight. And then you would be  stating for the record that the third reading of   the annexation would be held on April 28th to line  up with the other public hearings. Okay. Does that   make sense? It's getting there. Yeah. Okay. Thank  you for all this hard work. You're welcome. For   real. May I have a question? Go ahead, Vice Mayor.  You got a question. It I guess what I'm trying to   understand is I'm looking at tonight's agenda  and it says item number nine, public hearing. So we did we not appropriately notice this public  hearing that's on the agenda? We did uh when it   was publicly noticed uh 15 days in advance 21 21  sorry okay 21 days even for the development plan   even though we have a shorter okay that is the  development plan we did but when the agenda packet  

went out that is when these new um proposals for  the off-site improvements were added. So Casey do   you know the date the agenda packet was published?  The agenda packet for this meeting was published   last Thursday. So these have been available  since Thursday. I understand. I I think I've just we could have more of these happen in the f I  guess I we're we notice the public hearing by   law. It is rare that we have this situation.  It is. And I'm I'm I'm not It is very rare.   Um, I'm just trying to understand because this is  really confusing not only to us but to the public.   Understandable. And I'm I think I'm more concerned  with with how we we can't re figure out how we got   here. Maybe we can another day so we don't repeat.  Um, because this just really does throw really the   public. Honestly, I think this does even more  to confuse the public because let me just tell   you something. Everybody knows about this on who  is in the contiguous areas and not we got people   here from all over the the county. So, uh I want  to make sure that we're legally we have we have   let the public know legally what we were supposed  to let them know. Um but I don't think there's any   um yeah that's what I want to make sure that  we have done what we are legally required to   do to public notice a public hearing. You have  publicly, you have legally gotten to where you   need to be for what you have before you tonight,  but you haven't yet made an amendment to add the   additional language to condition 30. Once you  do that, now you have a new condition 30 that   we haven't publicly noticed cuz that's language  that's sitting on your on your desk in writing   on a p piece of paper that we haven't yet  publicly noticed. I understand that. But we  

can make adjustments on the floor. That we can  make amendments on the floor in regular order.   Regular order amendments that do not require  us to go back and republic publicize republish   a hearing. I can make an emission. We we can make  an amendment on the floor and change the language   of any thing in under consideration. Now, is will  we prefer? Of course not. Um, but it I guess I'm   trying to understand how simply changing the  language requires another public hearing. It's   really about property rights and that's where  a lot of the language comes from as far as like   what you how you um publicly notice information.  It's all about pro like property rights. If if you   made an amendment to a contract on the floor, no  big deal. And we saw this happen with the zoning   ordinance when we made a tweet and then we ended  up having a public hearing on our third and final   reading because we made an amendment on the floor  um and we didn't let people know. Um that's where   you just get that's where you are going to be  risky. That's where the liability will happen if   you don't publicly notice. Except the difference  is is that this is not actually impacting this is   not having to do with the zoning ordinance  or a legally binding government ordinance.   This is a development plan. A development plan  that yeah that has a new condition. Right. So   and it will have to go to planning commission. It  will and that's okay. I mean, and I would specify   that we don't normally end up in this situation  because when there are changes made to a plan,   it goes back to the beginning of the process or  to a certain point in the review process because   these are all site improvements that could  be reviewed only by engineering. I see that   then this kind of falls outside that window of  having to come back through the full process. So,  

this is not a normal occurrence for that  reason. We took a we took a floor off middle   eight Mhm. at on the floor and it went back to  planning commission for concurrence and then   back to maybe historic for maybe concurrent  something like that. Yeah. Okay. Thank you Joy. We would love for you  to come up and enlighten us   on the modification of standard shadow green. I've been waiting for this all day. Um  essentially and thankfully uh nothing with   the MOSS has changed. Um so everything that we  discussed previously at planning commission and   work session um including staff recommendations  and recommendations from the planning commission   have not changed. Um if you'd like I can have I  can run through those MOS's. I will be running   through the MOS's tonight um at public hearing. Um  so it's really up to you on on how much you'd like   to hear me talk. I'm sorry. I say, but anybody  have any questions on any of them? And I I'll   also include the handout um with the the motions  and everything that Emily just referenced. The on   the last page is a list of the MOS's um with  current staff recommendations and suggested   motions for those uh items. So, the will of the  board is uh not to go through the MOS's. Is that   what I'm reading? I will, but I'm a he will have  to go through them. Yeah. Yes. in addition to   so so has anybody got any questions about the  MOS's at this point are there any that planning   commission voted against staff approval on for  these uh yes that would be MOS uh number two and   number three for the architectural detailing above  the entrance for the house type and the townhouse   type um they voted unan unanimously to approve  staff is recommending to deny. So those are the  

only two that staff and planning commission  went against each other's recommendation. Yeah. Also, uh Mr. Bish wants to say something. Wait a minute. Go ahead. You're on now. Okay.  I said the planning commission did recommend   approval of them though, right? Correct. Yes. Yes,  they did recommend approval of MOOS number two and   number three. Again, staff's recommendation and  Mr. Valish did um just remind me that MOS number   one which staff and planning commission  recommended denial for they are no longer   pursuing as an MOS but it is included um in the  development plan. So we will have to go through   that process as well but they're just no longer  pursuing MOS number one. Would you summarize one   more time which ones planning commissions denied?  I I got very confused. So they outright denied MOS   number one. Correct. which is what um the de the  applicant is no longer pursuing and all the rest   everything else they recommended uh with staff  or well they recommended approval or approval   with conditions. So we're not going to go over No,  he'll have to go through the public hearing. When   he does, are you going to go through modification  standard one again because they've removed it,   right? Well, it's it's they're no longer  pursuing it. It's still in the plan. So   you still will have to make Yes, I got it.  Yes. or just outright deny it. Probably the   easier thing. Any other comments? Any other  business come before this body? We're journ