A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Franklin aldermen approve zoning text updates after heated debate over HG Hill building heights

January 14, 2026 | Franklin City, Williamson County, Tennessee


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Franklin aldermen approve zoning text updates after heated debate over HG Hill building heights
The Board of Mayor and Aldermen approved Zoning Ordinance 2025-25 on Jan. 13 after a lengthy public hearing that focused on a contentious amendment affecting the HG Hill property and how Envision Franklin interacts with city zoning.

The ordinance is an annual update to zoning text addressing overlay districts, signage, floodplain rules, and map changes. The specific dispute concerned language that would permit up to three stories on portions of the HG Hill site with the third story stepped back at least 10 feet and subject to development‑plan approval by the board. John Cooper of Holland & Knight, representing HG Hill, urged the board to follow the planning commission’s unanimous recommendation and approve the ordinance without the extra board development‑plan requirement.

Jimmy Granbury, representing H.G. Hill, said a development plan would trigger a rezoning and that the applicant had followed the expected process through planning commission and work sessions. Vice Mayor Baggett and other aldermen said public feedback favored retaining a two‑story historic corridor character along Columbia Avenue and argued that, while three stories could be allowed in parts of the site, the board should require a development plan (and rezoning) before such height was approved on the Columbia frontage.

Alderman Barnhill said he had no problem with three stories if setbacks were preserved and expressed disappointment that planning commission had not flagged the issue earlier. An amendment to remove the board development‑plan requirement failed 5–3. The original motion — to approve the ordinance as presented including the board’s amendment requiring development‑plan approval for third‑story setbacks — then passed 7–1.

Outcome and next steps: The zoning ordinance passed 7–1; staff and applicants were urged to coordinate on the process for any future development‑plan submittals and to clarify when rezoning would be required.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee