[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6080026,"mediaKeyId","2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b","parentId",2952193,"title","Coletta Park annexation, rezoning and parkland fee increase go before aldermen; staff outline alignment and access conditions","audioSeconds",115,"startMs",6543000,"endMs",6658000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b&start=6543&end=6658","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b/thumbnail_6543000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6080026/Franklin-City/Williamson-County/Tennessee/Coletta-Park-annexation-rezoning-and-parkland-fee-increase-go-before-aldermen-staff-outline-alignment-and-access-conditions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080026-93ae8604ac6723ea02e69386721a6108/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189090&Signature=GXhO9jsFybN-Y8hipmCTIHFubDSM~~cCjXfWHrufnfwH3my9RMycRPxy2B9eOhLwxvp-x4kGq7eNMBR2vBrKqaVnFjfMb5EYSpZNGTgbWn3VfmOOovuzcN2EDJ4vc0StwiBMd1Av7X3kONCf~lMAcgL-xwaD1cn~SPi55FQ3JLDMAS-i2Hsf1guW0ECIZwweCdPd-nMotdzhScOb3TPcwYHZX5bI29xGlWUJla63ZGrygYoRUbc9uHiX-04j7Nkek-1FR4cIwt0LW1d8WRvhoVqNiZVmUk1HYBwgWn-kOO-wrrxr~18EulAE-fAbTDbejevgVmg8wepZakjgYO632w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Franklin City, TN","date","2025-04-10T21:24:06.16Z","article","City planning staff and the applicant presented linked items for Coletta Park, including annexation of a 5.86‑acre parcel, revision of the development plan, and related parkland impact fee matters; staff and the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission recommended approval of the planning items.

Staff said the proposal adds land to the Coletta Park planned unit development and increases the total PUD density from 99 dwellings to 259 dwellings where the southern annexed acreage is in the city’s mixed‑residential policy area. The applicant and staff clarified the development’s internal access: a northern connection to Stanford Drive will remain emergency‑only and not become a public street; the southern annexation provides the required secondary public access to Crothers Road, enabling the project’s full build‑out. The developer stated the northern adjacency to Williamson County neighborhoods will retain larger lots and that emergency connections approved by the county remain unchanged.

On housing mix, the applicant said the southern annex area allows a mix of townhouses and smaller single‑family units to diversify price points rather than use only large single‑family lots. Staff and the applicant said the development will participate in improvements to Crothers Road and that Coletta Park has a full access on Crothers Road.

On parkland impact fees, staff presented a proposed ordinance amendment to index the city’s Parkland Impact Fee to a capped annual CPI adjustment (CPI or 5%, whichever is less). Staff said the adjusted fee would rise from the current fee (presented as $43.04) to a new indexed figure (presented as $52.68 under the CPI cap) and explained the mechanism: fees would be adjusted annually (March) up to the cap and the fee charged on a project would be locked at contract execution. Staff also described that current parkland impact fees in the downtown quadrant total about $500,000 and could help fund park work near the city hall redevelopment.

Planning staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the annexation, rezoning and the revised development plan; the applicant’s representative said the plan limits initial platting to a maximum of 138 platted lots until the second public access to Crothers Road is approved. The board did not take a final vote at the work session; staff asked for any questions and said the planning items will appear on a future consent or regular agenda for formal action.

Discussion vs. decision: the work session recorded staff recommendations and applicant clarifications on access, density and fee indexing. No final votes were recorded in the session on annexation, rezoning or fee ordinance adoption.

Next steps: staff will place the items on the upcoming agenda(s) for formal public hearing/action per noticing requirements and will provide any requested clarifications on fee calculation mechanics and access sequencing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Franklin, BOMA Work Session 4-8-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff presented four linked planning items for Coletta Park — an annexation, rezoning, revised development plan and parkland impact fee alignment — increasing the planned number of dwellings for the PUD and clarifying roadway access and parkland fee treatment.","taxTitle","Franklin City, Williamson County, Tennessee","taxId",4577,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6080032,"Staff outlines new Tennessee residential assessment districts; Franklin to weigh policy before any use",2415,3035000,5450000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b&start=3035&end=5450","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b/thumbnail_3035000.jpg","/articles/6080032/Franklin-City/Williamson-County/Tennessee/Staff-outlines-new-Tennessee-residential-assessment-districts-Franklin-to-weigh-policy-before-any-use","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080032-ceeb0906fafb81c639d295653c189afb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189090&Signature=DkJCp9pvWUpu5RVpUizR4QsIXfchYmhzzJKLWx0bYWXHghPpL6yXT5jySapNAkyg8RrO2Db2XkKZbU5~ZhFCmSAf-fFWICdscFFHlPud~GcZ8q4dWn-cxIyYosZSpYb4-pUEKmYClX7KQGTRDm-cojpvehkLCsytahEInoSKp-0wxF6aUAdc7bCOjWhgoviblut8HsS3qgHnQngoUOjNeX5XFQXrCMVoCxgLIO7o4fKUvQN8Ipk3N028MktxzbUWSacLcSnq4Pfrx6eu3xYGPk1c3IVyFkMrFz05ZMMu3K8qKioUYjAhJJAFXf00aStpuO3QawOs-nhzPb2Gc55Q5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff briefed the Board of Mayor and Aldermen on Tennessee’s new Residential Assessment District Act (RITA) and two early local implementations, and the board directed staff to draft policy guidance and bring the topic back for a focused discussion.

Assistant staff explained that the RITA statute, which became effective May 1, 2024, allows municipalities and counties to create special assessment districts to fund public infrastructure tied to a development, subject to statutory minimums and local policy choices. Key elements staff identified from the statute and early examples include a statutory minimum district size of five acres and minimum capital costs of $5 million; assessments may be levied for up to 30 years under state law; bonds can be issued by a local government or an industrial development board; and the statute allows an administrative fee of up to 5% of assessments to cover program costs.

Staff described the first Tennessee examples. Bristol’s first district capped the annual special assessment at $1,000 per parcel and limited the assessment term to 12 years; the Bristol district funded sanitary sewer work tied to a new residential subdivision and the city intends to administer billing and collection directly and expects to use its Industrial Development Board for debt issuance. Knox County’s district (a converted former industrial site) set a $1,000 annual cap with CPI adjustments, structured the term at 25 years for that project, and allowed off‑site road, water and sewer work in the eligible capital costs; Knox County’s documents named the Industrial Development Board as issuer and provided for the county trustee to collect assessments and enforce delinquencies.

Staff emphasized differences from existing local tools: RITA is “speculative” or non‑investment‑grade debt in many uses, carries higher interest costs than a city general‑obligation bond, and does not automatically rely on growth of assessed value the way a tax‑increment financing (TIF) district does. Instead, RITA bonds are secured by the special assessments themselves; staff stressed the importance of policy limits (minimum project size, allowable capital costs, maximum assessment per parcel, maximum term) and administrative responsibilities including billing/collection and oversight.

A number of aldermen said the tool should be used only when it meets a clear public benefit, such as workforce housing or remediation of a blighted industrial site. Alderman Burger and others suggested applying the tool to targeted areas — as an example Alderman Burger pointed to the Mack Hatcher/Northwest quadrant where a development partnership and a possible commercial change in state law (discussion in the legislature about adding commercial parcels to the statute) might create a local pilot case. Several members asked staff to return with a draft city policy on minimum acreage, eligible capital costs, maximum per‑parcel assessment and administrative cost recovery before the city considers any district.

Staff noted practical differences for Franklin: the city currently does not bill and collect its own property taxes (those services are provided by the Williamson County Trustee), its Industrial Development Board does not have full‑time administrative staff, and the 5% statutory maximum admin fee may not cover the city’s actual administrative costs unless additional funding or staffing is provided. Staff recommended monitoring the two Tennessee examples and drafting policy guidance for board review.

Discussion vs. decision: the work session recorded an extensive policy discussion and a staff request for guidance; the board did not adopt a policy or approve any district at the meeting. Members requested a follow‑up, focused work session and asked staff to draft a policy for review.","City staff reviewed the state's Residential Assessment District (RITA) law and two Tennessee examples (Bristol and Knox County). Aldermen asked staff to draft policy guidance and return for a deeper work session before Franklin considers the tool.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6080037,"City Hall redevelopment estimate narrows; staff outlines value‑engineering, phased park and monthly reporting",328,1205000,1533000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b&start=1205&end=1533","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b/thumbnail_1205000.jpg","/articles/6080037/Franklin-City/Williamson-County/Tennessee/City-Hall-redevelopment-estimate-narrows-staff-outlines-valueengineering-phased-park-and-monthly-reporting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080037-00167d311ebc7a17f7c3089318549259/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189090&Signature=aoWfgio0y6j-4~x7zTELYyaY44t07miE9Bgfqhs8io~47hQ7-kCmnovevvVHTe~t7zt3MW3ei8C1QbnBC6Hq5WKOkNVVt88KDyxgevis8gptJ3X8nV~EZbHIQyKncPaF0QmZ3VcVrxgX2djRQpR0UDgoxlyjByKOARciMfm4edppT3jKgTVc~dlKtsg9JKw3w6GZ~eQOWTPbNhekG0q3UJxP93vMhyJduedAeFqmUxMKpkt834TRjc6B1y4hujGnZ3lJQ9myOPvJOYWo5IQhZLdlL1A75TDGHEKxQpa7ab7akSWZ5y4ZvVIMNvkPGQfSwrWMF58IFC363EFpbD44kw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff told the Board of Mayor and Aldermen on April 8 that the city hall redevelopment remains under active cost review and value engineering, with the construction total for the full redevelopment estimated at about $86 million to $92 million and the broader program totaling in the roughly $101 million to $107 million range.

Project presenters provided a line‑item update: a functional city hall “sticks and bricks” range of $55 million to $58 million; promenade/square roughly $1.0–$1.2 million; a parking garage currently estimated at $17–$18 million (down from earlier $19 million); shell buildout of lower‑level tenant space $700,000–$1,000,000; internal site work (demo, utilities, abatement) in ERP1 at about $8.5–$8.9 million; and a park component at $3.0–$3.5 million. The first ERP package was reported at $8.9 million with roughly $425,000 in contingencies and allowances within that lot.

Staff described approximately $7 million of overall contingencies built into the program numbers to cover design and construction contingencies and a roughly 2% escalation allowance. Presenters said the estimate range has tightened from earlier work and stressed continuing uncertainty in lead times, tariffs and long‑lead MEP and AV equipment. Team members said the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) from the construction manager at risk (CMAR) is expected in February 2026.

The project team reviewed multiple value‑engineering (VE) ideas already under consideration, including removing coffered/beam ceiling millwork in non‑public spaces, reducing square footage of wood flooring in lower‑traffic office areas in favor of LVT/carpet, revising garage lighting to lower lumen counts while preserving visibility, and phasing or reducing the initial scope of the downtown park. The team said earlier choices to move staff into interim spaces without a commercial moving contractor saved “hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

Several aldermen pressed for limits on phasing that would delay core exterior features. Alderman Baggett, Alderman Brown and others emphasized keeping the streetscape on Third Avenue and the park’s primary elements in the initial work. Staff said parkland impact fees in the surrounding quadrant total about $500,000 and could be applied toward the park scope; staff also flagged the option to phase hardscape and amenities over multiple years rather than deferring core elements that could become more expensive later.

On procurement and schedule, presenters said ERP2 will include structural and long‑lead MEP items and procurement for those goods is being planned to reduce tariff and lead‑time exposure. The team said they are tracking lead times and tariff risk weekly and recommended early purchasing of items (AV, low‑voltage, some equipment) where cost and schedule risk justifies it.

Staff also showed a draft monthly project report format with photos and schedule and budget highlights, to be distributed to aldermen each month.

Discussion vs. decision: the work session recorded an informational update and direction to continue value engineering and procurement planning; the board did not adopt a resolution or appropriate funds at the meeting. Key outstanding items are the ERP2 procurement list, GMP negotiations with the CMAR and final park scope decisions.

Next steps: staff will provide the monthly reports, refine ERP2 content, continue VE analysis and return to the board with the Creekside project and any recommended phasing or funding changes for city hall.","Project team updated aldermen on the city hall redevelopment: construction estimates for the full program now range roughly $86–$92 million with a total program cost staff estimated about $101–$107 million, and staff presented value‑engineering options, the first early release package (ERP1) costs and a monthly reporting format.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6080042,"Franklin aldermen affirm Creekside as top capital-priority; staff to pursue acquisition details",897,107000,1004000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b&start=107&end=1004","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2952193-ca1aa945b5ddd2314a4d89788690959b/thumbnail_107000.jpg","/articles/6080042/Franklin-City/Williamson-County/Tennessee/Franklin-aldermen-affirm-Creekside-as-top-capital-priority-staff-to-pursue-acquisition-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080042-9056bec54017f38843af2cf1980b4514/orig.mp4?Expires=1771189090&Signature=gj~VQZ9HRpf6vtEVfO6w7McyQOeEUcf74-mCYeqauo-bu78n3grhxGGNQ40-FFKSOmYgrDvaDRzmricq7QlENJLA7gloCkjzapVwpCsSNyS3epqtsAviCDIYghnxBA52GYxDibSk-qtVuctMSQRuva2IN6AqWQR~kqOybQ1ZdGi-JfwEbmL1c21WWQkme2NVH~skg0LSa0b-U55KcPo3m787YJbhvR5qjb20qYYxkZa286519ER9QaiYwQixu9eytYj47aBKXmHhb1fS~mxvJFrDWibkXWh~hZOfeyh1tPEDN7JgRk00O2F~DarLC4ggJTWsobwYLY96OfvQdMWczQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Mayor and Aldermen of Franklin signaled staff to pursue acquisition and phasing work for the Creekside property after a second-round prioritization of the city’s capital investment plan.

City staff presented an updated prioritization exercise at the April 8 work session aimed at gauging board interest across 22 agenda projects. The presentation noted roughly $75,000,000 of funding capacity in the current model and flagged a potential state partnership on the Mack Hatcher Southeast project that could change the city’s funding capacity.

Staff urged the board to indicate projects it wants to move forward and highlighted a subset of projects that received consistent board support. “Your number one priority where seven of you identified it as a funding priority, which is the Creekside property,” a staff member told the board. Staff said having board concurrence would allow them to open additional dialogue with property owners and refine acquisition phasing.

Several aldermen discussed their individual prioritizations and trade‑offs among transportation, parks and public safety projects. Alderman Alden Brown and others emphasized balancing major roadway projects with park and quality‑of‑life investments; Alderman Caesar noted parks and public safety as priorities for both local amenity and visitor economic benefit. Vice Mayor Potts and other aldermen said they favored projects that improve traffic management, including a traffic/technology project for emergency services.

Mayor and staff asked whether any of the seven members who ranked Creekside first had changed their mind; no board member spoke up and the mayor interpreted that as direction to proceed. Staff said they will bring back a Creekside master‑planning presentation at a future meeting and refine cost and phasing information.

Staff repeatedly cautioned that the prioritization is a snapshot in time: the Tennessee Department of Transportation’s (TDOT) 10‑year plan and the state budget process may create partnership opportunities or additional capacity later in the fiscal year. Staff asked whether the board wanted a special work session to dig deeper into the list; members agreed additional focused time would be helpful.

What was discussion vs. direction: the meeting recorded deliberations across many projects but only a staff request and board concurrence on Creekside as an explicit direction. No formal ordinance or vote on project funding was taken at the work session.

Where this goes next: staff will refine acquisition cost estimates, present the Creekside master plan and propose next steps and timetable for negotiation and possible inclusion in the FY‑26 capital budget.","City staff presented a second-round prioritization of capital investments and asked the Board of Mayor and Aldermen to confirm top projects. By consensus the board signaled support to pursue acquisition and phasing plans for the Creekside property, which staff said was the group’s top-rated project.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Coletta Park annexation, rezoning and parkland fee increase go before aldermen; staff outline alignment and access conditions

Staff outlines new Tennessee residential assessment districts; Franklin to weigh policy before any use

City Hall redevelopment estimate narrows; staff outlines value‑engineering, phased park and monthly reporting

Franklin aldermen affirm Creekside as top capital-priority; staff to pursue acquisition details