33.68 acres on the US-68/KY-80 workforce-housing corridor — level, Flood Zone X, city water & sewer available. The current plan is 202 single-family lots. But the same land, stepped up the zoning ladder to R-4 or R-5 multifamily, delivers two to five times the doors into a city that needs 3,000 homes. This brief lays out every rung — and which one keeps the P3/TIF incentives.
The parcel is zoned R-1 today — low-density single-family, the base you rezone from. Hopkinsville's code (Ch. 158) then steps up: R-3 one/two-family at 7,500 sf/unit, R-4 multifamily at 2,170 sf/unit, and R-5 high-density multifamily at 1,240 sf/unit. Your current 202-lot plan sits at R-3 single-family density delivered through a PUD. Move up to R-4 or R-5 and the door count multiplies. Every step is a rezoning (map amendment) — not a variance.
| Rung | District | Density basis | Units / Lots | Per acre |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single-family (your plan) | R-3 / PUD | 7,500 sf/lot | ~202 lots | 6.0 |
| Multi-family · medium | R-4 | 2,170 sf/unit | ~540 (676 max) | 16–20 |
| Multi-family · high-density | R-5 | 1,240 sf/unit | ~900 (1,183 max) | 27–35 |
Realistic figures net of parking (~2 spaces/unit), setbacks, detention, and internal roads on 33.68 ac (1,467,101 sf). Ceilings are the raw density maxima (÷2,170 and ÷1,240). Actual yield requires an engineer's test-fit and confirmed utility capacity.
$90,000/acre is a commercial land price — a deliberate 23% discount to the Dollar General comp ($117K/acre) on this same tract. Spread across residential density, the per-unit land basis is low at every rung, and it drops sharply as you step up the ladder:
| Plan | Units / Lots | Land Basis Each @ $3,031,200 |
|---|---|---|
| R-3 / PUD — 202 SF lots | 202 | $15,006 / lot |
| R-4 — realistic | ~540 | $5,613 / door |
| R-4 — ceiling | 676 | $4,484 / door |
| R-5 — realistic | ~900 | $3,368 / door |
| R-5 — ceiling | 1,183 | $2,563 / door |
At R-5, land is roughly $3,368 a door — extraordinary for a Fort Campbell-adjacent rental market. But cheap-per-door isn't the whole story: single-family at $15,006/lot is what the city wants and will incentivize. The ladder is a menu, not a verdict — the right rung depends on product strategy and which path keeps the P3 stack intact.
Hopkinsville has a documented shortage of ~3,000 single-family homes (per ComDev director Tom Britton, AICP, who has escalated the P3 proposal to the Mayor — discussion-stage, not an executed commitment). Here's what this one 33.68-acre tract contributes at each rung:
Important nuance: the documented need is single-family. Multifamily doors add far more total housing, but may not count toward the SF-specific goal and could sit differently with the city's stated corridor priority. Confirm whether "workforce housing" includes rental/MF before assuming the incentive support carries over.
A single PUD can carry both — a single-family core that satisfies the city's SF goal and keeps the TIF, plus a multifamily parcel that captures Fort Campbell rental demand and drives total door count up. That threads the needle: more housing toward the 3,000 target without trading away the incentive stack.
The horizontal infrastructure for the 202-lot SF plan is ~$2.16M ($650/LF × 3,325 LF, per Suiter Surveys). Kentucky's P3 tools — under active discussion with the City — are sized to close that gap:
| Tool | Value | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|
| KY Tax Increment Financing | $7.0–7.9M | KRS 65.7041–65.7083 · 80% of increment, 20 yr · >3× infra cost |
| Infrastructure Cost-Share | up to $2.36M+ | City/utility absorbs trunk water, sewer, road-base directly |
| City Land Acquisition | Available | City buys at appraised value, developer agreement — cuts land carry |
| IDB / PILOT | Evaluating | KRS 154.50 authority under review — PILOT during development |
ComDev director Tom Britton, AICP has not formally committed to the P3 framework, but has escalated the proposal to the Mayor of Hopkinsville — a response is pending. Every incentive figure above describes a tool under active discussion, not a signed agreement. Underwrite the base case without P3; treat the stack as upside until executed.
The nearest new-construction comp, Echo Ridge, is closing 1,300–1,595 SF homes at $282,900–$296,900 in a 23-day average — Lot 16 closed at $217.45/SF. The market is absorbing product fast; the constraint is infrastructure, not demand. Land pricing is anchored below the strongest comps:
| Transaction | Date | Acres | $/Acre |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dollar General — same tract | Jul 2023 | 2.265 | $117,000 |
| Allen Road large tract · Clarksville | Aug 2024 | 88.89 | $101,249 |
| Subject — Cadiz Rd asking | 2026 | 33.68 | $90,000 |
Asking price is a deliberate 23% discount to the Dollar General comp on the same parcel and 11% below the Allen Road regional precedent. Source: RealTracs CMA, March 2026.
Buc-ee's breaks ground at I-24 Exit 89 in 2026 (~11 miles). A $19.8M KYTC road project is already underway on US-68/KY-80, directly serving the site. Fort Campbell's 35,000+ personnel sit ~15 miles out with consistent, largely unmet workforce-housing demand. And Hopkinsville is 65 miles north of Nashville — squarely in the path of middle-Tennessee spillover.
Per Tom Britton (ComDev), the smart route is not a direct R-1 → R-5 jump — the commission is likely to shoot that down. Instead: take the easy, incremental step to R-3 first (a single rung up, aligned with the single-family need), then layer the higher multifamily density on through a conditional-use / PUD approval. Staged beats a big leap. (Every step is a map amendment or use approval — not a variance.)
Verify R-1 of record (the listing also references B-2 potential) and the Hopkinsville-Christian County planning jurisdiction, with parcel 207-00 01 001.00.
The low-resistance step: a single rung up to one/two-family. Supports the 202-lot SF plan, aligns with the documented single-family need, and is the kind of incremental amendment the commission approves. KRS 100.213 comp-plan conformance is on your side.
Once R-3, pursue the higher multifamily density through a conditional-use / PUD approval rather than a direct up-zone. Britton flags this as the path of least resistance vs. an R-1 → R-5 rezone the county commission may reject outright.
Engineer's test-fit sets the real door count; confirm city water/sewer capacity; then execute the TIF / cost-share / land-acquisition structure with the City before closing on the density basis.
Staged, not direct. R-1 → R-3 is the easy approval; the R-5-level density comes second through CUP/PUD. A direct R-1 → R-5 request risks a flat rejection at the county commission — the incremental path keeps momentum and preserves the city-partnership goodwill that underpins the P3 stack.
1. Product vs. stated need — the city's documented gap is single-family; confirm MF qualifies for the workforce-housing priority and P3 support before pricing to 540–900 doors. 2. Sequence the rezoning — go R-1 → R-3 first (the easy approval), then layer R-5 density via CUP/PUD; a direct R-1 → R-5 request risks a flat rejection at the county commission (per Britton). 3. Utility capacity — "available" ≠ sized for 900 doors; get a capacity letter. 4. P3 is unexecuted — underwrite base case without it. 5. Density wording — §158.059 reads "2,170 sf per three units or more"; confirm the per-unit reading with the Planning Commission.