Planning staff recommends rezoning 1.11‑acre Lafayette/Riggins lot to enable infill homes; neighbors oppose higher density

Planning staff presented a zone‑change request (case Z01/Z12025) from GP Contractors LLC for a 1.11‑acre parcel at the intersection of Lafayette Road and Riggins Drive during the Jan. 30 Clarksville City Council meeting. The applicant seeks to rezone the property from R‑1 (single‑family residential) to R‑2A (higher‑density single‑family residential) to demolish an existing dilapidated house and create infill lots for detached single‑family homes; planning staff recommended approval and the planning commission recommended approval.

Planning staff described the site as a long, narrow lot fronting the east side of Riggins Drive in council Ward 2, within the Lafayette/Peachers Mill planning area, with an adjoining recent annexation that brought R‑4 zoning across the street. Staff said the future land use map designates the site for suburban neighborhood and that the city’s comprehensive plan supports mild residential density increases in aging neighborhoods. Staff estimated the property could yield about four lots under typical subdivision standards and noted a zoning provision that could set a Lafayette Road setback up to 50 feet where the majority of homes on a block face exceed the standard setback.

The department of streets said primary access would be required from Riggins Drive (the minor road); staff noted the city’s access ordinance allows the developer to appeal to an access‑appeals board to seek driveway access onto Lafayette Road but said the initial requirement would be Riggins Drive access. Planning staff told council there is no gravity sewer immediately available at the site; the applicant stated during comment that sewer exists on Riggins Drive and could be extended to serve the property.

Planning documents in the council packet included a letter of opposition from a nearby resident. Councilman McLaughlin said he submitted two additional letters to the planning commission and expected adjacent property owners to speak against the rezoning at a future hearing; he said the main neighborhood concern is that R‑2A would introduce higher density than the surrounding R‑1 and R‑2 pattern and that the change could permit four houses on one lot adjacent to larger single‑lot homes.

Councilman Chandler asked planning staff to clarify the access rule and environmental review process; staff said environmental review for this case focused on wetland, floodplain and septic issues and that no adverse environmental conditions were identified. Staff also said the planning commission’s recommendation and the staff position were that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan’s goals for infill in aging neighborhoods.

There was no council vote on the rezoning on Jan. 30. Planning staff recommended approval and noted additional public comments and questions will be addressed when the item returns to the council for action.