Board grants preliminary approval for two multifamily bond requests; amends Artist Lofts bond structure

The Health and Educational Facilities Board voted to give preliminary approval to two multifamily housing bond requests and approved an amended final bond structure for a previously authorized project.

At a public hearing, Elmington Capital Group sought preliminary inducement for ECG Edge Hill LP to issue up to $60,000,000 in multifamily housing revenue bonds for a new-construction, 215-unit development of one- through four-bedroom apartments in the Fort Negley/Edge Hill area. The developer characterized the project as phase 2 of a larger redevelopment that followed a 290-unit phase 1 called Hillside Flats. Board members asked about tenant income limits and local demand; Elmington said all units would be restricted to 60% of area median income (AMI) and described strong leasing demand across its portfolio in Davidson County. After a motion and second, the board approved preliminary inducement; the meeting record notes one nay and otherwise indicates the motion passed.

The board also considered a preliminary inducement request for a 280-unit project at 927 Skyline Ridge Drive from Clear Blue (development manager Carter Swayze). That project, sited on roughly 20 acres, was presented as primarily two- to four-bedroom family apartments with about 25% of the two-bedroom units (approximately 70 units) proposed for permanent supportive housing (PSH). Clear Blue said the PSH cohort would be coordinated through the city's office of homeless housing and that many households would arrive with Housing Choice vouchers. Board members asked about programmatic services, lease terms and how households would transition if their incomes rose; the developer said leases would typically be 12 months and that tenants who earn above the voucher threshold may be able to remain in-place at the property. The board approved preliminary inducement for the Clear Blue project.

Separately, the board approved an amended final approval for Artist Lofts LP (Holiday Ventures). Reed Lauer said the project itself has not changed since the board granted final approval last year; the amendment adjusts the bond structure to produce more construction proceeds and close a financing gap. The amendment passed on a voice vote with no recorded opposition.

What the votes mean: preliminary inducement is an early, nonbinding board step that allows applicants to pursue state tax-credit and bond rounds; it is not a final bond issuance. The amended Artist Lofts action modifies bond structure after the board's earlier final approval but does not alter the approved project scope as described by the applicant.

Details developers provided: Elmington said the Edge Hill project would contain 215 units targeted to families and capped at 60% AMI; Elmington described earlier phases and strong wait lists. Rents cited for a comparable 60% AMI rent matrix were roughly $1,200 for a one-bedroom, about $1,450 for a two-bedroom, about $1,650 for a three-bedroom and about $1,800 for a four-bedroom (figures described as estimates that could change by lease-up). Clear Blue described the Skyline Ridge site as 20 acres with green space and said it had applied for and received a Barnes Fund award that helped cover land costs. Clear Blue said it partners with an East Tennessee nonprofit, Appalachian Home and Health, to provide resident programming and support services but said specific PSH services for the Skyline property were still being developed.

The meeting record shows the board moved and seconded the motions for each item and approved ECG Edge Hill LP and 927 Skyline Ridge Drive on a preliminary basis and approved the Artist Lofts amendment on final approval. Tally counts beyond a single recorded nay on the ECG Edge Hill preliminary motion were not specified in the transcript.

Board questions and clarifications focused on AMI targeting, income-averaging practices (applicants said they sometimes use income averaging but that these Nashville projects were structured as 60% AMI), how Housing Choice vouchers would work at the properties, and whether households displaced by earlier phases retained an ability to return (developers described high retention and relocation at comparable projects but did not provide a precise percentage).