Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I call this meeting to order. This is the August 27th, 2026 meeting of the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission. And we'll begin with the roll call. Commissioner Harrison? Absent. Commissioner Allen?

Present.

Commissioner Franks? Absent. Commissioner Lindsay?

Present.

Commissioner Orr is present. Commissioner Mann? Here. Commissioner McLemore? Present. Commissioner Williamson?

Present.

Alderman Peterson?

Here.

All right. So this is a time for citizens' comments. This is open for citizens to be heard on any issue or concern. If you'd like to speak on a specific item on the agenda, please wait until that time for a citizen comment occurs during that item. For all citizen comments, please fill out a speaker card and hand it to staff, come up to the microphone and state your name and address, and limit your comments to two minutes. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on an item that's not on the agenda tonight? All right. Seeing none, move on to item number one, approval of the, consideration of approval of the July 23rd, 2026 FNPC minutes. Have a motion?

So moved. Second. Okay.

Have a proper motion and second. Any comments on this item? None. Let's proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right, the ayes have it, and those minutes are approved. Announcements from staff?

I don't really have any major announcements. I did want to let the Planning Commission know that while Tom Marsh has already left for the evening, he has a joint conceptual workshop. This is actually his last meeting with the Planning Commission, and that was his last joint workshop. He is retiring in early September, early to mid-September, and so he will be at the board meeting, the first board meeting in September, but this is his last Planning Commission. tonight so just want to let y'all know that Shanna McCoy has been appointed as the new director of building and neighborhood services and she is actually out of the office today but she will be joining us at future meetings any additional announcements that's it all right item two consideration of approval of items 3 12 and 13 on the consent agenda a motion

Is there a second for that item? Second. All right. I have a proper motion. Second. Anybody like to pull an item from consent? All right. Seeing none, we'll vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsey? Here. Commissioner Orbeck's aye. Commissioner Mann.

Yes.

Commissioner McLemore.

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson.

Aye.

Alderman Peterson.

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. The consent agenda is approved. Item number four, consideration of resolution 2026-62, a resolution amending the 508 Duke Drive subdivision preliminary plat to extend the vested rights for the property located at the southeast corner of Mallory Station Road and Duke Drive, located at 508 Duke Drive. Staffs?

Thank you. The request is to extend the vesting completion date for the 508 Duke Drive subdivision preliminary plat for three years until September 22nd, 2029 to allow the applicant to secure all site plans and necessary permits and complete construction on the final lots created by the plat. The preliminary plat for the 508 Duke Drive subdivision was approved by Planning Commission on September 22nd of 2016. The plat includes the establishment of four non-residential lots. Staff recommended approval with conditions of the plat. The preliminary plat received final approval by city staff in December 2016, but the developers have not yet completed final development of all laws associated with the approved preliminary plat. The property is zoned light industrial. Lot 4 has completed construction per its approved site plan. Lot 3 has completed one of the two buildings shown on its approved site plan. There are no site plans approved for lots 1 or 2. The final plat has also been approved and recorded with the lot lines of lots one and two slightly adjusted from what was shown on the preliminary plat. The developers indicated that all construction was suspended as a result of the 2020 pandemic and subsequent challenges to the office market have prevented them from finishing construction on the remaining lots. It is their intent to finish or build out the approved preliminary plat and please reference the applicant's letter for further explanation as to the extension request. If the vesting period is not extended, the project entitlements would cease to exist. Stop work orders would be issued if applicable. A new development would need to be approved and would be reviewed against the current local development standards. Should the vested rights be continued, the site plans for the remaining lots would be reviewed under the previous ordinance and not today's standards. In reviewing the plan against current city regulations, the proposed layout from the preliminary plat and the approved but not yet completed site plan generally do not comply with current standards and regulations. The differences in today's ordinance versus those under their vested ordinance are substantial, particularly in relation to architectural standards and frontage standards, which did not exist when the preliminary plat was first approved. As stated previously, the corresponding final plat for the property was approved and recorded with the county. As such, all the lots are currently buildable lots. If vesting were to expire, the lots would still remain as buildable lots. The biggest challenge with the approved lot layout is accommodating frontage for lot two. Today's ordinance would require any building on this lot, at minimum, to front onto an internal drive, since the lot does not touch right of way. Staff feels that this accommodation could be made for the lot, but may not accommodate the same size structure as previously proposed for lots one and two. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine whether the continuation of vested rights for the 508 Duke Drive subdivision preliminary plot as requested in resolution 2026-62 is in the best interest of the community given the information provided.

Thank you. Anyone from the public like to speak on this item? I have one speaker card. Corey Craig, please come forward.

State your name and address. Yes, my name is Corey Craig. I am at 489 Old Town Road, Brentwood, Tennessee. I don't know if you can hear me. I'm one of the owners of the property. I'm here representing the other owners of the property. If you guys have any questions, I'm here to answer them. I think you did a great job explaining where we're at. The bottom line is we want to continue on the project. We just got suspended for COVID and subsequent financing that's going on right now. So it's a tough market to build right now.

All right, so you're a public comment and applicant. Yes, indeed. All right. Does anybody from the public like to speak? Anybody else? Okay. Any other things you'd like to add as the applicant? No, sir. All right. Okay. Can I have a motion on this item? Approval.

I'll second.

Okay. Have a proper motion and second. Discussion? Anybody have thoughts on it? None. All right. For a proper motion and second, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner France is absent. Commissioner Lizzie? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. That item passes. Item number five, consideration of Resolutions 2026-65, a resolution amending the Franklin Commons South Subdivision Site Plan, Section 4, Revision 1, to extend the vested rights for the property located at the southwest corner of Franklin Commons Court and Wood Duck Court, located at 175 Rosa Ham Way. Staff?

Good evening. This request is to extend the vesting period by two years for the Franklin Commons South Subdivision Site Plan Section 4, Revision 1 from January 17, 2027 until January 17, 2029 to allow the applicant to secure any necessary permits and commence site preparation. The Franklin Commons South Subdivision... was approved on January 17, 2024 on the consent agenda. This site plan includes a 110,736 square foot commercial building. It is a six-story self-storage facility on 1.65 acres. Staff recommend approval with conditions of the site plan. The site plan received final approval by city staff in February of 2024, but the developers have not yet obtained permits or commenced site preparation. Wood Duck partners have an agreement with the owner of the adjacent lots, allowing them to use this lot as a construction staging area until their project is completed, which is expected to be completed by August 2027. The owner's vesting extension request letter is attached. If the vesting period is not extended, the project entitlements would cease to exist. Stop work orders would be issued if applicable. A new development would need to be approved and would be reviewed against the current local development standards. In reviewing this plan against the current city regulations, the current plan generally complies. The differences in today's zoning ordinance versus their vested zoning ordinance are minor and could be incorporated into the design without major changes to the plan. Staff recommends that the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission determine whether the continuation of vesting rights for the Franklin Commons South Park Subdivision Site Plan Section 4, Revision 1, as requested in Resolution 2026-65, is in the best interest of the community, given the information provided. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Is anyone from the public like to comment on this item? All right. Seeing none, we have an applicant.

No. Oh, here we go. Hi. I'm Wes Baxter with M2 Group. I'm here on behalf of the client. I'm here to answer any questions that y'all might have.

All right. Thank you. Do I have a motion on this item?

Move for approval. Second.

All right. I have a proper motion to approve in a second. Any discussion? All right, seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore? Aye. Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right, the ayes have it. This item passes. Item number six, consideration of ordinance 2025-19, an ordinance to rezone 20.33 acres from estate residential ER district to light industrial LI district to plan PD 9.2 slash 75,000 district for the property located east of Franklin Road and north of Harpeth Industrial Court, located at 318 Franklin Road, 1-1-1-1-7, 1-1-2-1, and 1123 Harpeth Industrial Court, Harpeth Village PUD subdivision. Staff.

Thank you. The rezoning is in correlation to the development plan for the Harpeth Village PD subdivision, also on tonight's agenda. The plan includes 187 multifamily units and 75,000 square feet of non-residential uses. Envision Franklin places this property in the factory district design concept, which states that this design concept is anchored by the factory at Franklin, which has been a defining community landmark since its opening in 1929. The vision of the district is to expand the types of uses found in the factory at Franklin to surrounding properties in order to create a memorable destination. The vibrant uses at the factory at Franklin should extend beyond its walls and integrate into Harpeth Industrial Court. Key characteristics of the district should include high-quality architecture, plazas, outdoor dining, art, tree-lined streets, and pedestrian and bicycle amenities. The rezoning, as presented by the applicant, meets the recommendations of Envision Franklin. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 2025-19. Thank you. All right.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who is not the applicant who would like to speak on this item? I have one speaker card. Craig Gamble, are you a public speaker or an applicant speaker? All right. I don't see anyone from the public, so applicant, please come forward.

We get chastised by Mayor Moore when we don't turn in a speaker card even if we're the applicant, so it's a habit and it's hard to break. I'm Greg Gamble and I'm representing the landowners and the applicants. May I get my presentation pulled up? Thank you. This is the master plan for Harpeth Village. Many of you have seen this before as we've come before you at the joint conceptual workshop and a couple of times. This property is split. A portion of the property is in the historic overlay. A portion of the property fronts onto Harpeth Industrial and is not in the historic overlay. Because it's in the historic overlay, though, we have been before the Historic Zoning Commission's DRC committee nine times. And we've been before their voting meeting once with successful recommendation to the Planning Commission and Board and Mayor and Aldermen with the plan that we're sharing tonight. The property is within the factory district. The vision of the district is to expand the types of uses found at the factory of Franklin to surrounding properties in order to create a memorable destination. It's about place making. The vibrant uses of the factory in Franklin should extend beyond its walls and integrate into Harpeth Industrial Court. Key characteristics of the district should include high-quality architecture, plazas, outdoor dining, art, tree-lined streets, and pedestrian and bicycle amenities. One of the things that we've noticed as the factory kind of changes its program, has expanded its program, is that these small maker spaces have disappeared. Now, every space that is available that's around 3,000, 4,000 square feet in Jameson Station is occupied today. And so there are a lot of components in our master plan that you're going to see that resonate with those smaller maker spaces that are in Jameson Station. This is the existing site and it has a scenic corridor overlay on it along Franklin Road. So nothing can be built within that scenic corridor overlay. And then right behind that we have the hilltop hillside overlay. And then we have the hilltop hillside buffer which is a 500 foot offset from that. The railroad track is along the eastern property boundary there. We hired an archeologist to investigate this property. In the bottom right of this screen, you can see what was mapped as a three-sided Civil War fort. That fort sat right on top of this hill, that's shown in this yellow, kind of yellow box area right here. And the archeologist marked on site where they found anything that was metallic with their metal detectors. Now, they were mostly square nails and horseshoes. They didn't find any Civil War relics. But on the church's property off site in this back corner in the woods, there's an old cistern. And this cistern was constructed for the soldiers during the Civil War and was a main point of water source for them and for the armies. So we have committed in our plan to set aside 6.49 acres of land that would become a public park, or become a park, sorry, it'd be a private park, privately maintained, but would have walking trails on it that the public can use. We have been talking to Franklin's Charge, to Friends of Franklin Parks about how they could get engaged with us and how we could come up with kind of a community plan, a community approach to this land and this area. I've got a board here that shows the master plan. It's a little bit easier to read than this screen that I have in front of you. But every single building that you're seeing as a part of this plan is a commercial mixed-use building, which means it has commercial in it in some way. Now, there are also buildings that have residential homes as a part of them. These three buildings right here, you may see resonate with the size and scale of the Jamison Station buildings that front onto Liberty Pike. These are going to have commercial on the ground floor and then two-story for sale condos on the upstairs above, just like the buildings that are at Jamison Station. So we're kind of replicating those, but these are smaller in scale than the ones at Jamison Station. This has a parking structure behind it. The access to the top of the deck is from here. The access to the lower level of the deck is down here. So we're using the land and we're using the grades to make sure we have that parking that's hidden and tucked behind. This is a just standalone commercial building. It'll be one and two stories in height. This is a two-story office building. And then we have a mixed-use building that's fronting onto Harpeth Industrial here. This will have commercial on the ground floor and then residential on the upper floors above. These will be more traditional apartments. There's an access to the lower level of the deck that comes in off of Harpeth Industrial, and there's an access to the upper level of the deck here from the back. So that's kind of how those parking areas are working. We have been talking with engineering staff. We have an area that we would like, our team would like for the Planning Commission to weigh in on. We didn't want to create a spike strip that this property at Morningside Drive couldn't access this public street. So we have the right of way going all the way to the property line in this area shown here in white. Staff has asked us to extend the parking lot drive aisle to the property line. Historic Zoning Commission was not very excited about that because they didn't want to put a drive aisle in front of a person's house and were very particular about wanting us to have landscape there. We are really, can go either way. We want to be respectful of staff, obviously, and their recommendations of the Historic Zoning Commission, their recommendations, and would love, for this particular instance, for the Planning Commission to weigh in on it. So if you would give us some commentary on that, we would be grateful. And then Aaron with 906 is going to come up and walk you through the architecture. And I'm going to use the board and kind of point where these images are taken from.

Hi, my name is Aaron Rodgers with 906 Studio Architects. And as Greg described, we went through multiple rounds of design review with historic zoning on this project. Here's a view looking southeast. Yes, Greg has it there. And historic zoning was concerned with height, mass, and scale. So we really tried to work with them over multiple revisions and design reviews to really tailor the buildings to kind of meet this standard of creating a nice pedestrian-friendly streetscape. Some of the methods we did to work on that were to recess the balconies. We removed balconies that were on the lower second floor, and we also tried to reduce the heights to reflect more of a relationship to Main Street. On this page you can see an elevation view showing how these updates basically created a streetscape that read like a collection of smaller buildings and that was important so it wouldn't look like one mass. Here's a close up of the corner of that same center mass of building two. And you can see how we're trying to activate the streetscape with restaurants, with the ground floor commercial. Again, create that pedestrian friendly atmosphere. Here's an elevation further down, again, kind of showing how we've broken out the massing into individual buildings. There's a plaza that's going to be kind of the central jewel box for this development, and this is a view looking east from that plaza. And here at the south end, this reflects similarly to what we did on the north end of the building, again, having some corner end cap components that show off the balcony and the covered area that could be used for a restaurant. Here's an aerial view looking south and this shows the scale of the overall development and how it's kind of tucked behind the hillside so it really won't be seen from Franklin Road. We've also created this pavilion kiosk that'll have informational placards referring back to the fort that Greg had described. Here's a view looking east, and this also shows that central jewel box plaza from Morningside Drive. So you can see the termination of Morningside Drive and the residential home there. We wanted to really reflect the scale of that residential area that's adjacent to the property, so our jewel box will step up in height as it gets further back into the development and away from Franklin Road. Here's a view looking northeast, again, at that jewel box plaza, and we're really interested in placemaking, creating a plaza that people can gather, restaurants, again, that mixed-use component with the residential on the second and third floors, but stepping back that third floor so that it reduces the appearance of overall height. Now here are three views that are along Harpeth Industrial Court, so as we turn the corner and head further south, in these elevations you can see we're dealing with some topography, and so what we tried to do here was step the architecture with that topography, also stepping back the upper floors. These will also be mixed use with that commercial component on the street level. And here you can see a plaza on that internal access drive where we're working with topography to also create this nice communal area that will open up to, the commercial will open up onto that. And if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer those.

Thank you, Aaron. We do have four modification standards, and I'll talk about that with the development plan. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

All right, do I have a motion for this item? Recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Alderman. All right.

Second.

All right. Have a proper motion and second. Any discussion?

I had some discussion on the architectural piece, but we can probably handle that on the next item. Okay.

And then I had some on the connectivity.

We'll handle that later, too, definitely.

All right. And we can talk about the driveway on the next item as well. All right. All right. We have a proper motion for approval and a second. There's no additional discussion. We'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson? Oh, is recused. All righty. Alderman Peterson. Yes. All right. The ayes have it. This item passes. Item number seven, consideration of resolution 2025-51, a resolution approving a development plan for the Harpeth Village PUD subdivision with four modifications of development standards, signage, building elements for the property located east of Franklin Road and north of Harpeth Industrial Court, located at 318 Franklin Road. 1017, 1121, and 1123, Harpeth Industrial Court. Staff. Thank you.

The applicant has submitted a development plan for the Harpeth Village PUD subdivision. The development plan proposes both commercial buildings and commercial mixed-use buildings types ranging in two to three stories. The plan includes 187 multifamily units and 75,000 square feet of non-residential uses. Envision Franklin places the property in the factory district design concept. Envision Franklin states that uses along Harpeth Industrial Court should be a mix of local commercial, light industrial, institutional, and multifamily on upper floors. Established light industrial uses are encouraged to remain. Uses related to arts and culture are encouraged. New buildings should consist of traditional and industrial character so as to continue the established rhythm and scale of the street with a maximum of three stories for new construction along Harpeth Industrial Court. Along Franklin Road, landscaping should be utilized to preserve and enhance the established character. For the property north of Morningside Drive, future development should be located behind the hill. The proposed development is clustered along Harpeth Industrial Court and behind the hill. As part of the development, the applicant has included the construction of trails and signage discussing the location's history and relevance to Franklin's time during the Civil War. The architecture presented in the conceptual drawings maintains elements of the industrial character of the area, blended with rural architectural elements more typical along the Franklin Road Historic District. and the plan has received a preliminary recommendation of approval from the Historic Zoning Commission. There are four modifications of standards requests with this development plan. They pertain to signage and building elements. MOS number one, the applicant is requesting to permit irregular shape signage within the development. Section 15.1.3 of the ordinance requires that signage not be irregularly shaped. The applicant has received a preliminary recommendation of support from the Historic Zoning Commission for the overall development and proposed modification of standards. It should be noted that the entirety of the development is not within the historic preservation overlay, so some signage depending on the location would not be reviewed by the Historic Zoning Commission. And just as a general note, these circumstances applies to all signage modification of standards requests about historic zoning. Additionally, the Board of Mayor and Alderman has approved similar requests for irregularly shaped signage in the past. City staff is reviewing this regulation as part of the updates to the upcoming zoning ordinance updates. For these reasons, staff is supportive of this request. Staff recommends approval of MOS number one. MOS number two, the applicant is requesting to modify the requirements for canopy signage to allow one canopy sign per tenant and to allow signage to extend above or below the canopy. Section 15.5 of the ordinance limits the number of canopy signs to one per building facade and may be used only if no wall, band, or awning signs already exist. It is the applicant's intent to create a pedestrian-oriented, pedestrian-scaled development with ground floor retail and commercial uses. Given the pedestrian nature of the development and support from the Historic Zoning Commission, staff can support the request and recommends approval of MOS number two. MLS number 3, the applicant is requesting to allow one vertical blade sign per commercial mixed-use building where residential exists and permitted if other hanging signage is present as well. Section 15.14 of the ordinance for vertical blade signs limits one per building frontage on a street intersection and may only be used... if no other hanging signage is present. Due to the limited number of allowable vertical signs, support from the Historic Zoning Commission, and because City staff is reviewing this regulation as part of the updates of the upcoming zoning ordinance, staff can support the request and recommends approval of MOS number 3. MOS number 4, the applicant is requesting to allow buildings to have frontage at an angle from the road they face. Section 6.9 of the ordinance requires that buildings front parallel to the street. The applicant has indicated that this request is limited to Building 2, as depicted in the accompanying graphic with the MOS. The Board of Merit Aldermen has approved a similar request that is limited to specific buildings or lots to help with the road network and provide additional open space for pedestrians. Staff can support the request with the added condition that the actual MOS request includes language that it limits the request to Building 2 and that the applicant provide additional information on how that space will be activated for pedestrian use. Staff recommends approval with conditions of MOS number 4. So with all of that in mind, staff recommends to the Planning Commission to recommend approval with conditions to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen for Resolution 2025-51. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public who is not the applicant who would like to speak about this item? Seeing none, applicant?

Hi, Greg Gamble again representing the applicant. I just want to point out a couple of things just to make sure that it's clear. This building right here is the building that we're requesting the modification of standards number four for because there's a little pocket park out in front and it's not turned parallel to the road. So I just want to make that clear. Modification of standards number two regarding the canopy signs, Jameson Station, their sign is above the canopy. So again, consistency with what's at the factory district. The factory has irregularly shaped signs approved as a part of one of their modification of standards. And I think recently, Ovation asked for the blade signs. I think staff's reviewing that too, potentially to change in a future zoning ordinance. So we're happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. All right, thank you. Do I have a motion on this item? Recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

Second.

All right, have a proper motion and second. Let's move into the modification of standards, and then we'll come back to the overall item. So MOS number one, request to permit irregular shaped signage. Recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

Second.

All right, approval. Second. Have a proper motion and second. Any discussion on this one? All right. Seeing none, proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore? Aye. Commissioner Williamson is recused for this item. Alderman Peterson. Yes. All right. The ayes have it. MOS number one passes. MOS number two is request to allow one canopy sign per tenant and allow signage to extend above or below the canopy.

Approval. Second.

All right. Proper motion and second. Discussion? Anybody have anything? All right. Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay?

Aye.

Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson has recused for this item. Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. MOS number two passes. MOS number three, request to allow one vertical blade sign for commercial mixed-use building where residential exists and permitted if other hanging signage is present. Motion? Recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

Second.

Second. Proper motion is second. Anybody have comments, thoughts on this item? All right. Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsey? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson is recused for this item. Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. MOS number three passes. And what's number four? Request to allow buildings to have frontage at an angle from the road.

Move for approval. Second.

And is that with staff conditions?

With staff conditions, yes.

Approval. Second. Second. Any discussion on this? None. Proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson is recused. Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. MOS number four passes. Let's resort back to the main motion. Any discussion overall on this item, including the four modification standards?

Yes, I think this would be where we would have discussion. There were questions asked by Greg, Mr. Gamble, I'm sorry, about connectivity that was recommended by staff. I think the Historic Zoning Commission was kind of poo-pooing it. I'm always going to be in favor of connectivity. We can see the mess that some other communities, which I will not name, have had and continue to have and is being compounded. When we don't, whenever there's a chance, we need to require, and it's required by, actually by our ordinances. So yes, for those two points, definitely, most definitely.

So let's get the applicant back up and just explain to us a little better about the concern here and what we're, what advice we need to give you on this item.

I think the zoning commission, their concern was they didn't want to have a street go in front of someone's house. Well, that's what happens. There are going to be streets that go by your house. You may not have one now, but I didn't have one, but I have it now. And it's turned out okay because cars drive on the streets.

We're simply looking into the future. Engineering's looking into the future. We have provided a right-of-way connection here, but not a road connection. So that road connection can be made at some point in time in the future by the adjacent owner. Staff is asking us to have a driveway connection to the property line in this location as well, so we have two points of connectivity.

So both of these will be active when the development is constructed, or are they... Constructed to the property line. To the property line. So you're not making the connection, you're providing access.

That's up to the adjacent property owner to make.

Okay. Anybody have?

Yeah, I echo Commissioner Allen's comments on the connectivity piece. On the architecture piece, the mixed-use buildings in the middle, the condos, that view right there, I'm guessing, was that portion reviewed by the historic zoning and

Every slide that you're seeing in here was a part of the Historic Zoning Commission's presentation.

It just doesn't feel as industrial as maybe the ones on Haley Industrial Drive. I know the whole concept is industrial, almost the extension of the factory.

Very intentional, right? The closer you are to the factory, the more... factory like the buildings are in our presentation, the more you go north on Franklin Road, the more the architecture evolves and changes into a different way, even the architecture that's on Harlinsdale right now. So really what Historic Zoning Commission was asking us to do is not to create a false sense of history, but to have architecture that kind of transitions to more residential as you're moving north, so it's not as industrial on Yeah, now they've said look we're only approving the massing in the scale of these buildings So when they were being critical of the architecture was about having recesses. So this second this third floor here is pushed back I think 10 or 15 feet these side pieces here pushed back. This is pushed back over here on this side So it looks like a collection of smaller buildings. That was what was important. They did say we're not finished With our full approval of all the elevations, we have to go back. We have to submit these buildings again to the Historic Development Commission. All right.

I'll leave it to them to iron that out.

I'll jump in a little. I think there is kind of this sense of or a need to almost blend the rural aspects of going up Franklin Road and that being a historic district itself and then the factory having industrial components to its history and there's been a lot of discussion about where do we land Can we somehow come around to some blend of the two?

It feels to me like it's a little bit more like that portion belongs in like a suburban area. I wouldn't view that as like a transition to industrial. It feels very something like maybe Cool Springs. But I think we're really close. It was kind of minor, but since it's still got to go back to historic zoning, I anticipate we'll come out with a good result.

Any additional discussion? Okay, seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. We have a proper motion for approval and a second, and this includes all of the approved modification of standards 1, 2, 3, and 4. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay?

Aye.

Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson has recused. Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right, the ayes have it. Item number seven with the modification of standards is approved. All right, item eight. Somebody get Commissioner Williamson. Here she goes. Item eight, consideration of resolution 2026-64, a resolution approving a revised development plan for West Haven PUD subdivision with one modification of development standards, surety bonds, for the property located south of Highway 96 west and west of Board Mill Pike. Staff.

Thank you. The applicant has submitted a development plan revision for West Haven PUD subdivision. As you know, it is a mixed-use development located northeast of the intersection of Old Hillsboro Road and New Highway 96 West. The applicant is proposing a revision solely to request a modification of standard to allow surety bonds in lieu of an irrevocable standby letter of credit. West Haven PUD subdivision is composed of 1,520.03 acres. The proposed revision does not request any changes in entitlement and therefore no rezoning was required. West Haven is vested within the July 1st, 2018 zoning ordinance, which does not have surety bonds as an option. Therefore, the City of Franklin's current zoning ordinance Whereas, I'm so sorry, whereas the City of Franklin's current zoning ordinance does allow for this option. The applicant is utilizing the development plan revision process to request the use of surety bonds through a modification of standard. This development plan does have one modification of standard as stated. The request is to allow a surety bond in lieu of a standby letter of credit. Chapter 6.2.1 states that a performance agreement authorized by the Department of Planning and Sustainability shall be secured by either an irrevocable standby letter of credit with an automatically renewable feature, often termed as an evergreen letter of credit, a cashier's check, or other method of surety deemed adequate by the Department of Planning and Sustainability. The beneficiary of the surety shall be the City of Franklin. Staff is not concerned with this request as it meets the requirements within Chapter 21.22 of the 2026 Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommends approval of MOS number 1. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen to approve Resolution 2026-64. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

Anyone from the public like to comment on this item? All right. Seeing none, I have an applicant.

John Jacoby with Southern Land Company. Happy to answer any questions you all may have.

All right. I'd like to have a motion.

Move for approval.

To the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

All right. I have a proper motion for approval and a second. Let's move over to the modification of standards and take care of it next. So MOS number one, a request to allow a surety bond in lieu of an evocable standby letter of credit. Recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Alderman.

Second.

All right. I have a proper motion and second. Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay?

Aye.

Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williams?

Aye.

And Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. MOS number one passes. Go back to the main motion. Any additional discussion on that item? All right. Seeing none, proceed to vote, including the MOS number one. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsey?

Aye.

Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. This item passes, including modification standard one. Item number nine, consideration of resolution 2026-52 as amended a resolution approving a development plan for the Poplar's Reserve PUD subdivision with three modifications of development standards, street and circulation for the property located north of Clovercroft Road and east of Oxford Glen Drive. Staff?

Thank you. This is a development plan that you've already seen. It's for Poplar's Reserve PUD development plan. It was approved by the Board of Mayor and Aldermen at the August 11, 2026 board meeting. The development plan was approved with two additional conditions of approval that were added by the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. Those conditions are as follows, that the side setbacks for all lots along Clovercroft shall be 50 feet from Clovercroft Road, and that all off-site improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. This item is coming back to the FNPC for a vote of concurrence on the two new conditions of approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the conditions added to Resolution 2026-52. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Anyone from the public care to comment on this one? All right. Seeing none, applicant?

I'm happy to represent the applicant tonight, since I represented them at the diploma meetings. I'm here to answer questions if you have any.

All right. Thank you. I have a motion on this item.

Move for approval. I'll second.

All right. promotion in second and the modification of standards mentioned were approved the first time, so we don't have to go through those again, correct? All right. Any discussion on this item as a whole? None? proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann?

Yes.

Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson? Yes. All right, the ayes have it. Item number nine passes. Okay.

Sorry, Jenny, can you say it one more time? Okay. I'll be recusing for item number 10. All right.

I got you. Thank you. Item 10, consideration of resolution 2026-49 as amended, a resolution approving a development plan for the Denson Place PUD subdivision with four modification of development standards, parking open space buffer for the property located west of Natchez Street and north of Action Street located at 137 Natchez Street. Staff?

Thank you. And similar to the last item, you've already seen and provided recommendation for this plan. As a reminder, this is the Denson Place PD subdivision with 97 multifamily units as part of the Franklin Housing Authority's master plan. The Board of Mayor and Alderman also did vote to approve the development plan at its August 11th meeting of this year. They did add a condition of approval that the applicant shall use the 612 route Roof design for the three-story multifamily building as presented on the floor for the BOMA meeting. That exhibit is included with your materials this evening if you'd like to take a look at that. As a result, the development plan has come back to the Franklin Planning Commission for a vote of concurrence. Staff's recommendations have not changed.

Thank you. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to comment? Seeing none, applicants?

Yes, again, I'm Greg Gamble, representing Elmington and Franklin Housing Authority in their joint venture on this property, and happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Do I have a motion on this item?

Second.

All right. Proper motion is second. Any discussion? None? All right. We'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsay? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

And Commissioner Williamson recuses for this item. Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right, the ayes have it. Item 10 passes. Item 11. Oh, let's wait for Commissioner to come back. All right, item 11. Altera subdivision preliminary plat creating four residential lots and two open space lots on 5.82 acres located northwest of the intersection of South Carothers Road and Copley Road. Staff?

Thank you. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the Altera subdivision that consists of four single family residential lots and two open space lots. The R1 district is intended to provide for single-family residential with lot sizes of at least 15,000 square feet, designed with walkable, well-connected street systems, and designed around natural features as accessible community amenities. All proposed lots within the Altair subdivision meet the standards of the R1 zoning district, and staff is recommending approval with conditions. Thank you. All right.

Thank you.

Anyone from the public care to comment on this one?

All right. Seeing none, do I have an applicant?

Keith Brotherton. I'm with Brotherton Land Surveying and happy to answer any questions.

All right. Do we have a motion on the side?

So moved. Second.

Proper motion and second. Any discussion? All right.

Go ahead.

A lot of these are put on the consent agenda. Help me understand why this wasn't on the consent agenda.

so preliminary plots are a little different given that we provide public well that we require the applicant to send out public notices for these items we generally have a policy of not putting them on the consent agenda in case there are neighbors that may want to attend the meeting and make a public comment also typically we have had in the past some questions from the planning commission on certain aspects especially when there's public comment okay so

Nothing particular about this one being treated differently. Got it. Thank you. All right.

Any additional discussion? Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Commissioner Harrison is absent. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks is absent. Commissioner Lindsey? Aye. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson? Yes. All right. The ayes have it. Item 11 passes. Is there any additional business? All right. Is there a motion to adjourn?

So moved. Second. All right.

I have a proper motion and second. All in favor, say aye.