Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears rezoning request for Elm Street lot to RM‑4 amid questions about density

Clemson City Council · April 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a public hearing the council considered a request to rezone a 0.71‑acre Elm Street parcel from Office Professional to RM‑4 (multifamily). Planning staff said the change would align the lot with adjacent RM‑4 parcels; councilors raised questions about site constraints and likely building types.

At a public hearing on April 20, planning staff told the council a single‑lot rezoning application would return a 0.71‑acre parcel on Elm Street from an Office Professional district to RM‑4, the city’s highest‑density residential zoning. Jacob, the planning presenter, said the planning commission recommended approval at its March meeting and that the site is surrounded by RM‑4 properties.

The change would allow multifamily uses — from townhouses to a small apartment building — subject to the site’s size and parking requirements. "You could absolutely just have a little row of townhouses or it could be an old apartment building," Jacob said, adding that an apartment building at that size would likely be a small project of roughly six units.

Councilors pressed staff on the property’s history and whether the neighborhood had been rezoned previously. One council member asked who had sought the original change in the early 2000s; Jacob said he believed the same owner had requested the earlier rezoning. Another councilor asked whether the surrounding parcels had always been RM‑4; staff said at least for the past 30 years the area has been RM‑4.

Nathan Henkel, who the city engineer confirmed has been engaged on some nearby projects, and other council members noted parcel size and parking ratios would limit the scale of any development. No public comments were submitted online and no members of the public spoke at the hearing.

The hearing record will carry forward to the council’s consideration as the item moves through the legislative reading process.