Clarksville council approves several zoning changes, rejects one high‑density rezoning after public concerns

The Clarksville City Council on first reading approved multiple zoning and map amendments brought forward from the regional planning commission and staff, rejected a controversial high‑density rezoning and postponed another petition for more review following public comment.

Council approved Ordinance 108, rezoning a parcel on Alpine Drive from O‑1 office district to M‑1 light industrial, and Ordinance 109, rezoning a parcel at the terminus of Stone Bluff Way and Kennedy Road from A‑G agricultural to R‑2A single‑family residential. Both items carried recommendations for approval from Regional Planning Commission staff and the commission itself; Ordinance 108 passed first reading unanimously (13–0) and Ordinance 109 passed first reading 12–1.

A separate request, Ordinance 110, would have rezoned a parcel at the Needmore Road/Thrush Drive area from R‑1 single‑family residential to R‑5 residential. Neighbors and council members raised concerns about existing flooding, traffic congestion on Needmore Road, and compatibility with the surrounding R‑1 neighborhood. Toni Morgan, a resident on Needmore Road, testified that there is an “incredible amount of flooding” in the area and urged the council to deny the rezoning. After deliberation, the council voted 0–13 to reject Ordinance 110 on first reading.

On a nearby parcel currently zoned C‑2 general commercial, Crest Properties (represented by Bryce Powers) asked to rezone to R‑2A single‑family; Powers said the company estimated the C‑2 zoning could produce roughly “120 to 125” townhomes under commercial rules but that the proposed R‑2A would reduce that to about 38–39 lots. Powers requested a 30‑day deferral to meet with city street and stormwater staff about drainage considerations; Council accepted a motion to postpone Ordinance 111 until the August regular session (postponement approved 13–0).

Council also took up Ordinance 112 to expand the city’s design overlay districts to include Fort Campbell Boulevard and Tiny Town Road corridors. Council discussion noted concerns about setbacks and parking visibility raised by property owners and an engineering firm, but the Regional Planning Commission had recommended approval. After discussion and an exchange about an existing Madison Street corridor overlay used for comparison, Ordinance 112 passed first reading 7 yes, 5 no, 1 abstain.

Public commenters emphasized drainage and flooding issues for multiple items. Marilyn Demerchen, whose family lives near West Beller Boulevard, described a ditch that connects to Concord and Ashbury Road and warned that development could aggravate flooding behind existing homes. Council members from wards near the contested parcels reiterated that the R‑5 proposal would be “100% surrounded by R‑1” and said it did not fit the neighborhood character.

Council members and planning staff noted that several rezoning proposals were consistent with the city’s land‑use plan or comprehensive plan and that the Regional Planning Commission staff had recommended approval of the items that passed. Councilman Streetman and other members credited RPC and staff for coordination with the street department and emphasized that final development approvals will require stormwater, street and building permits and any necessary detention or retention measures.

The decisions recorded on first reading will return for second‑reading action where applicable; several items were first readings only or postponed. Council recorded the votes on the items as follows: Ordinance 108 passed first reading 13–0; Ordinance 109 passed first reading 12–1; Ordinance 110 failed 0–13; Ordinance 111 (Running M Properties) was postponed to August 2025 (postponement approved 13–0); Ordinance 112 passed first reading 7–5–1.

Council emphasized that approvals or denials at first reading do not by themselves authorize construction; proponents must comply with all permitting and infrastructure requirements before building.