Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies rezoning request for Taylor Drive after residents raise safety and scale concerns
Summary
After more than a dozen residents urged council to block large multi‑unit development, Clarksville Town Council voted 6–0 to deny rezoning of 3165 Taylor Drive from R‑1 to R‑3, citing narrow streets, traffic and incomplete plans.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clarksville Town Council on May 12 voted unanimously to deny a requested rezoning of 3165 Taylor Drive that residents said would permit dense housing behind long‑established single‑family lots.
Councilwoman Henderson moved to deny Ordinance 2026 ZO4, and the motion carried 6–0. The rezoning had been described at Plan Commission as allowing a range of multi‑unit housing types; several speakers told the council the change could be scaled up later under R‑3 zoning. "If it's zoned R‑3, I believe you said that he could put 82 units back there," said Thomas White, who lives adjacent to the site. "That would completely change the dynamics of our neighborhood," he added.
Residents detailed site‑specific safety and quality‑of‑life concerns. Brenda Molina, a realtor who said she has lived in the neighborhood eight years, told council the original presentation suggested "around 30, 32 houses" but warned the property could later accommodate as many as 80 homes and estimated "150 to 200 vehicle trips per day" for certain buildouts. Betty Herrick, a 30‑year Taylor Drive resident, described repeated late‑night dumping, fence damage and a vehicle collision into a gas line near a neighboring apartment complex and said she did not want a larger development adjacent to her yard.
Owner Randall Edens addressed the council and said he owned the parcel and was available to answer questions; council discussion focused on whether the Plan Commission recommendation and public turnout supported denial. President McKeown closed debate and the denial vote followed. The council recorded the action as a decision to deny the rezoning request; no alternative zoning or conditional plan was adopted at the meeting.
Next steps: the denial leaves the property in its existing R‑1 classification unless the owner files a substantially revised application and returns to Plan Commission and council for reconsideration.
