New Franklin City Council delayed action on a proposed planning‑consultant contract with Envision Group LLC on March 19, 2025, after extended debate over the contract’s scope, cost and potential effects tied to the city’s multi‑phase sewer project along State Route 93.

The council’s discussion focused on a six‑month, $24,000 engagement that would prioritize State Route 93 while also making consultants available for work on the Manchester Road/State Route 619 corridor and other development needs. Mayor (unnamed in the transcript) told council members the consultant team combines local knowledge with outside planning expertise and that the contract includes “specific timelines, specific deliverables” for the initial period.

The debate centered on whether the city should hire Envision now or solicit additional proposals. Councilmember Jim Shaffer (first reference: Councilmember Jim Shaffer) and others said the proposal felt “siloed” and that the city should seek fresh ideas and broader proposals. Councilmember (unnamed in transcript) asked whether the engagement could be split into phases so consultants would not duplicate future planning work if corridor studies change.

Why it matters: City leaders said development along State Route 93 and the 06/19 corridor is one of the few opportunities to increase tax and income revenue needed to sustain public services. The mayor told the council that sewer construction timing affects property owners’ obligations: the city has negotiated with Southern County Public Health to allow property owners to defer mandatory sewer tie‑ins until after phase 2 of the sewer project, and residents on SR 93 will have about three years before mandatory tie‑in notices would be issued after phase 2 completion.

Key numbers and timelines cited in the meeting:
- The Envision proposal: $24,000 for six months (transcript discussion characterizes the SR‑93 work as the 6‑month, $4,000 portion).
- Sewer timing: staff said the sewer for the SR‑93 corridor will be “in the ground next summer” (staff/mayor statement) and the mayor said phase 2 is “optimistically” targeted around 2028; council repeatedly referenced a roughly three‑year window before mandatory tie‑ins would be enforced.
- Federal grant history referenced: a prior $3,000,000 federal appropriation for the sewer (fiscal year 2023) was discussed as unlikely to materialize; the mayor also noted a $4,000,000 water grant and later confirmed a separate EPA reimbursement grant of about $970,000 for the water project had been finalized and is a reimbursement grant.

Council concerns and staff responses
Council members pressed the administration on several points: whether the consultant would follow the city’s comprehensive plan, how the firm would coordinate with ongoing corridor studies (including a separate study conducted with OHM), whether the fee structure would lead to additional charges for work outside the stated months, and whether the 6‑month timeline was premature given outstanding zoning and sewer questions. The mayor said the engagement is intentionally limited to allow the city to terminate if results are unsatisfactory and that the Envision team’s core staff (identified in the record as project managers with planning and civil engineering credentials) would provide the substantive land‑use work.

Public comment and related agenda items
Multiple residents spoke during public comment. A homeowner whose property adjoins the SR‑93 corridor urged caution about mandatory tie‑ins and asked whether grant funds or other assistance might offset costs for lower‑income residents. Another resident objected to proposed walking/biking path alignments through parts of the corridor, saying, “I am 100% against it” (public commenter, Global Creek area). Several speakers also urged the council to consider local regulation of short‑term rentals; one commenter described short‑term rentals appearing in an established lake neighborhood and asked the city to revisit regulation. Councilmembers said they had previously paused short‑term‑rental regulation work because of pending state legislation and asked staff to gather recent examples and return with options.

Next steps
Rather than vote on the Envision agreement, the council asked for more time. The administration offered to issue a broader request for proposals for a development team if council members wanted wider market testing; the mayor said he would do that if the council preferred. Planning & Zoning will resume its separate zoning‑district review the next day and the council has a public hearing set for April 2 on revised subdivision regulations.

Votes at a glance
- Resolution 25‑R‑20 (change order to Owens Excavating Services LLC for the Orange Way culvert replacement project and then‑and‑now purchase order): adopted, vote recorded as 7–0.
- Resolution 25‑R‑21 (agreement with Sun Life for voluntary life and vision insurance): adopted, vote recorded as 7–0.
- Resolution 25‑R‑22 (agreement with Envision Group LLC to serve as planning consultant): council asked for time / tabled; no adoption vote recorded at this meeting.

Ending: The council left the Envision proposal open for further review and directed staff to prepare either a revised contract or a request for proposals, depending on the council’s preference; planning and sewer scheduling information will be available at future meetings.