Historic zoning commission recommends denial of preliminary plan for 318 Franklin Road development

The Franklin Historic Zoning Commission on June 9 voted to recommend that the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission and Board of Mayor and Aldermen deny the developer’s preliminary plan for a large mixed‑use project at 318 Franklin Road. Staff and commissioners said the conceptual plan raised unresolved concerns about height, massing, transitions to adjacent one‑story residential buildings and potential retaining wall impacts on the Franklin Road viewshed.

Staff planner Emily Clindon reported that the proposal included three large mixed‑use buildings placed primarily behind an existing hill to preserve Franklin Road’s open viewshed. Staff noted the submission lacked some information required to determine whether building heights and massing were consistent with the Franklin Road Historic District guidelines, and that the adjacent structures on Morningside Drive were one-story buildings and were not included in the packet for comparative height analysis.

The applicant team (Gamble Design Collaborative and 906 Studio) explained the design intent, referenced the Factory Design District policies in Envision Franklin and described steps taken to break up long façades and step back higher volumes. Landscape architect Drake Reeder and Meredith Booker of 906 Studio presented the massing and fenestration strategy and noted they had revised stepbacks since the previous DRC meeting.

Commission members said the plan set the tone for future redevelopment of the Harpeth Industrial Court area and that the stakes were high: several commissioners argued the massing read heavier than the historic factory and that additional buffer and transition to Morningside’s ranch houses were needed. One commissioner said the proposal “reads much heavier, handed to me than the factory.”

After discussion the commission voted to recommend denial of the preliminary concept to the planning commission and BOMA, citing the staff-identified guideline conflicts: building height and massing not consistent with historic commercial heights, insufficient transition within 10% of adjacent building heights and lack of sensitivity to rear‑adjacent historic residential structures. The decision was explicitly framed as a preliminary recommendation; the commission noted applicants may revise and return with additional studies if the BOMA/planning review allows.