Franklin Housing Authority proposes 91‑unit Natchez Place redevelopment; neighbors raise traffic and parking concerns

The Franklin Housing Authority on Thursday presented an early concept to replace the aging Natchez Place development with a 91‑unit, affordable housing project and said the plan will be submitted to the city for review on Monday, May 11.

"This meeting is really about one specific place, this block, this site," said Matt Huff, a landscape architect and planner on the Natchez Place project, opening the presentation and outlining the team working with FHA. Huff said the concept prioritizes circulation, landscaping and a height transition that keeps two‑and‑a‑half‑story buildings along Natchez Street while stepping to three stories on the side facing the former HG Hill parcel.

Why it matters: Natchez Place is an older public‑housing community the authority says is reaching the end of its practical lifespan. The project team described the plan as part of the FHA's long‑range master plan to increase and modernize affordable housing on land the authority already owns. Neighbors, however, said the proposed density and on‑street parking shown in renderings could strain narrow neighborhood streets and the area's historic character.

Derwin Jackson, president and CEO of the Franklin Housing Authority, described a multi‑year redevelopment program that began in 2008 and said most conceptual plans since 2010 have intended demolition and rebuild of older sites to increase long‑term stewardship and density. "It was always to tear them down and rebuild," Jackson said, adding the authority has in the past chosen to rehabilitate some properties when economically appropriate.

Residents pressed for specifics. "91 units is kinda causing me a little heartburn on this," said Marsha Allen, a property owner across the street, who said she feared additional traffic and street‑parking impacts on Natchez and Acton Streets. Other attendees said the two narrow, one‑lane streets cannot safely accommodate additional curbside parking.

The project team said technical studies will guide mitigation. Project staff told the meeting a traffic study is already under way, will be reviewed by city staff and a third‑party engineer, and that any recommendations from that process will become required conditions of the development plan. Huff said parking shown in the concept reflects an approach consistent with the city's standards and that the current proposal provides 208 parking spaces for 91 units—about a little more than two spaces per unit.

Key numbers and affordability: The team said the proposed development would contain 91 units with a unit mix described during the meeting as 37 two‑bedrooms, 47 three‑bedrooms and 7 four‑bedrooms. The transcript contains two different figures for the current number of units on the site (Matt Huff referenced both 34 units and, later in the Q&A, a participant referenced 38 units); the record in the meeting is therefore unclear on the exact existing unit count. A project representative identified in the meeting as "LC" said the proposal will be 100% affordable under tax‑credit rules and that units will average to about 60% of area median income, with some project‑based vouchers used to serve lower‑income households.

Resident return and ownership: Jackson said former residents who want to return can be offered units as part of the authority's established relocation and re‑occupancy practices; he said past redevelopments offered a mix of relocated units, vouchers and new placements and that no one moved from prior projects was left without housing options. The authority confirmed it owns the Natchez Place property and that other FHA‑owned properties mentioned in the chat—including a 16‑unit property near Spring Street—are separate projects with separate grants.

Process and next steps: Huff said the team plans an initial submittal to city staff on Monday, May 11; the proposal will then proceed through the city's public review process, including planning‑commission review and subsequent hearings before the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. Project documents and the traffic study will be made publicly available on the city's planning portal; Huff offered to share links by email.

What remains unresolved: Neighbors flagged street‑parking feasibility, the visual impact of three‑story massing in a historic area and the timing of reviews as outstanding concerns. Huff and Jackson said these issues will be examined during the city review and through required studies, but no final decisions were made at the meeting.

The meeting was recorded and will be submitted to city staff along with the comments collected; the team said it will continue refining the concept through the city review process and public feedback.