Developer proposes 230‑unit apartment near I‑65 interchange; neighbors raise traffic and parking concerns

Madison Capital is seeking a development plan and rezoning for a five‑story apartment building with about 230 units at the northwest corner of the I‑65 interchange at Goose Creek Bypass, project representative Jeff Rosiak said during a virtual neighborhood meeting with Franklin City residents.

Rosiak, who identified himself as a designer with Gamble Design Collaborative representing Madison Capital, said the early design calls for one‑ and two‑bedroom apartments, ground‑floor amenities including co‑working and fitness spaces, and a mix of on‑site amenities such as a pool and a small dog area. The building would front Old Goose Creek and rely primarily on internal structured parking, he said.

The proposed site sits in a 12‑story height overlay under the city’s Envision Franklin planning framework, Rosiak said, noting that a prior Envision Franklin amendment for this parcel limited standalone multifamily to six stories because of access constraints. He told neighbors the team is pursuing the standalone multifamily allowance for this location because the site does not have a practical direct connection to Goose Creek Bypass.

Neighbors focused questions on traffic, parking and utilities. Michael Matias, who identified himself during the meeting, estimated that 230 units could generate roughly “about 460 new cars,” and asked how that added traffic burden and population would affect nearby neighborhoods and Franklin’s water system. Rosiak responded: “We have a traffic study that is in process of being prepared and working through review with the City of Franklin. That review is also reviewed by a third‑party reviewer,” and said required traffic improvements will be established through that review.

Resident Jason Deal questioned whether the units would be for sale or for rent; Rosiak said the project is planned as apartments. Deal also flagged parking, saying on a quick count he saw about 40–45 surface spaces and questioned whether the structured parking would meet city requirements. Rosiak said the project will submit a parking study as part of the review process and expects to meet requirements through internal structured parking access from both east and west.

Several attendees urged better access connections. One resident cited an estimate from the city engineer that nearby Old Patonsville Road could see a large increase in daily traffic — an estimate cited in the discussion was on the order of thousands of trips a day versus current counts in the hundreds — and expressed concern that traffic would be funneled through neighborhood streets because the proposed site lacks a direct outlet to the bypass.

On environmental issues, Deal urged caution if the team pursues a dog‑park amenity near Five Mile Creek, saying such facilities can be environmentally impactful. Rosiak acknowledged the concern and said amenity plans are still being worked through.

When asked whether a 12‑story office could be built on the site under RC12 zoning if standalone multifamily were not allowed, Rosiak said such an outcome could be possible in theory but would still be subject to parking and impact requirements and different peak‑period traffic patterns.

Chelsea Randolph of the City of Franklin posted contact information in the meeting chat for Jonathan Marston, the city’s assistant director of engineering, and directed technical questions about capital projects and timelines to him. Rosiak said the team anticipates submitting plans to the city in the next month or two, possibly appearing before the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission in March and before the Board of Mayor and Aldermen between April and June, and that additional public meetings will be advertised as the review proceeds.

The meeting closed with the project team thanking attendees and noting they will continue work through the public review process.

Next steps: the project team said they will complete and submit a traffic study and parking analysis as part of the formal application; the public review schedule provided by the team places a likely planning‑commission hearing in March and Board consideration in the April–June window.