[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6183939,"mediaKeyId","5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0","parentId",5093424,"title","BZA approves multiple variances, including lakeside setback and access variances for several landowners","audioSeconds",4099,"startMs",176000,"endMs",4275000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0&start=176&end=4275","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0/thumbnail_176000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6183939/Coffee-County/Tennessee/BZA-approves-multiple-variances-including-lakeside-setback-and-access-variances-for-several-landowners","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183939-ab42e8dfe3999742c5df90428ec8dd04/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440102&Signature=hUTd3mlh7R9hzE-Lzz~gDN~j7l3dpC1M1kka38UCefkICOjpVVJNFwrdD2YGGZr8bL~QaFA9R96QkpoasI8yS8CSnIcRm00DQH0H~O17MwvdQj~iT2w7-99TXomdhsPrBQm-o5UEg0Qy1fDQZoM2mmGfFyuRPWk6REijOtUhkcmsF3OQ1fxnk3GlIl-EUi9o2sxVJdi4ItDiI7xscGWTHUGRQXlggFqmda8pYys8dUeLnE8jy0C9ogliwa3jSs2uIViWaKOhmMwfZm9To7SVVx65FwoDaSBYmkDKiIRDChMDaw25uHtoiE4sBYd1-U8vxl2WJsZMvYCHn4Ory7f9bQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Coffee County, TN","date","2025-06-27T01:44:15Z","article","The Board of Zoning Appeals approved several variances by unanimous votes during its June 26 meeting, including a setback variance for a lakeside lot in an older subdivision and access variances that enable property owners to pursue building permits using existing drive configurations.

At the meeting, Ernest (Novelio) presented a variance request to reduce a side‑yard setback for a waterfront lot, citing topography, septic field constraints and the lot’s irregular shape. Staff confirmed that nearby hydrant fire‑flow readings exceeded 500 gallons per minute and that the proposed building would remain 50 feet from the nearest occupied residence. Following questions about original subdivision variances and current code (50‑foot front, 25‑foot side/rear in the district), the board voted 5‑0 to approve the requested setback for that specific site.

Michael Logan presented a separate access variance for a tract spanning roughly 10 acres divided into a 4.5‑acre and a 5‑acre section; he described long‑standing use of the drive and recent site improvements. Staff reported that septic approval had been obtained and that emergency vehicles had previously accessed the drive. After members confirmed the applicant had widened portions of the drive to county standards where applicable, the board approved the variance 5‑0.

Another variance request, presented by counsel for Michael (Wilcott/Walcott) on a farm split between Coffee and Bedford counties, sought permission to rely on an existing 50‑foot right of way (Nancy Lane) that has historically served the property. Speakers provided TVA maps and historical use data for the lane. The board approved that variance 5‑0 as well, noting that the structure to be built is actually sited in Bedford County but requires access through the Coffee County parcel.

Board members asked applicants to confirm platting, septic permits and that any necessary federal authorizations (where TVA land is crossed) be verified before final building permits are issued. In each case, staff said standard county permitting and inspections remain required and that approval was limited to the specific relief requested for the identified parcels.

The approvals clear the way for applicants to move forward with county building permits, subject to the normal inspections and any federal approvals where TVA right‑of‑way is implicated.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","6/26/25 Board of Zoning Appeals","oneSentenceSummary","The Coffee County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a batch of routine variances June 26 — including a reduced side‑yard setback for a lake subdivision lot and access variances for Michael Logan and Michael Walcott — after staff confirmed fire flow and septic compliance.","taxTitle","Coffee County, Tennessee","taxId",70973,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6183944,"Coffee County BZA grants special exemption for three duplexes on Old Seminary Road despite widespread neighbor opposition",3802,5226000,9028000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0&start=5226&end=9028","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0/thumbnail_5226000.jpg","/articles/6183944/Coffee-County/Tennessee/Coffee-County-BZA-grants-special-exemption-for-three-duplexes-on-Old-Seminary-Road-despite-widespread-neighbor-opposition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183944-a6ef9be9b4993188aa5fc20de156b747/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440102&Signature=Z4PrxdRE5-j3EZ23SS4l42BRJJUQjXFjAFfiKpSI~lIhtu5lK39cA-IRf8wuIAmBNuzgDVtfaKNIe5-vtdQv0EVMemXajiC71A~r~U7VLRdAp82ikgVZ2cjGj6dZVRqlA7lOWqLWHD1iqeYwORzq-w1QkXG~UxLPOm8mUgYtwi9fGMAuYUO-P2nGQBvlquLpr95mhttF-xi7EVfTI4v6nSpKu2qBtcXuQ-ixcDr~8ju0bvsZvm-qvu-C2zqclVB7kPydNdmVoDEPE8lvGXmIr41zpSpi2pjuWoJvFHCnVj2XkaRBzvywoUNNLU9Cd6Y7Mx4uECG3pMc5ygjETOP-OA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Zoning Appeals of Coffee County voted 4‑1 June 26 to grant a special exemption permitting three duplex structures to remain and be used where they were sited on Old Seminary Road, a narrow rural county road, after an extended public hearing with numerous residents objecting to traffic, infrastructure capacity and deed restrictions.

Neighbors characterized the site as a low‑density rural residential area and said the duplexes were moved onto the property before the special exemption was decided. They raised concerns about road width, emergency access and water‑line capacity, and some residents cited deed restrictions imposed at the time the land was subdivided.

Sharla Graves, a nearby resident, said the structures were unannounced and moved onto Swan property in May and June and that code enforcement told her the applicant had a building permit; she said that was inconsistent with a prior BZA decision and with neighborhood expectations. “It took approximately 2 hours for each 1 of these to get down our road,” Graves said, describing the transport of the units and the disruption to the single‑lane stretch.

Several residents warned that the three duplexes would set a precedent for higher‑density rental development on rural county roads. Aaron Carmine, who lives on Old Seminary Road, told the board: “Please do not allow our beautiful county land and roads turn into congested rental complexes.” Other speakers cited reduced property values, inadequate road maintenance and the fact that two of the duplex foundations were already poured.

Applicants and supporters said the units were intended as well‑maintained rental housing and presented a subdivision plat showing three separate parcels totaling about 4.31 acres for the sites in question. Cheryl Swan, speaking for the family, said permits and plats had been worked through county staff and planning, and that the structures would be maintained with lease terms prohibiting junk vehicles and other typical nuisances. She said the units were 24 by 72 manufactured homes that, in appearance, would read like single family houses when clad and finished.

During the hearing, a procedural technicality was discussed: an earlier application had been filed with a single parcel number, which panel members and some residents said complicated the prior BZA review. County staff and other speakers noted that the applicant later subdivided and obtained separate permits tied to each new parcel, a point cited by those supporting approval.

Board members discussed emergency access, road width and whether approving the exemption would conflict with deed restrictions; staff said deed restrictions are a civil matter outside the board’s jurisdiction, while zoning compliance is within it. The board also heard that the water line feeding Old Seminary Road is understood to be 4 inches and that county rules for larger, higher‑density subdivisions require larger water mains; staff said those standards apply at the major‑subdivision threshold and that the three units did not themselves trigger a major subdivision review under current thresholds.

After deliberation, a motion to approve the special exemption passed on a 4‑1 voice vote. The board’s approval allows the property owners to proceed with county permitting for the individual parcels as configured; the board emphasized that codes, septic and building inspections remain enforceable and that civil deed‑restriction disputes are for private parties and courts.

Residents said they would monitor the site and consider legal options if they believed deed restrictions or other civil constraints applied. The vote reflects a legal distinction the board must apply between zoning authority and private deed restrictions, and it underscores continuing tensions between families seeking rental income and neighbors seeking to preserve rural, low‑density character.","After extensive public comment and disputes over permits and road adequacy, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a special exemption allowing three duplexes to remain on Old Seminary Road by a 4‑1 vote.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6183949,"Coffee County BZA allows Ilner to use historic 10‑foot Cross Creek access despite neighbor objections",0,1145000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0&start=1145&end=1145","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5093424-6d3054e95a697b19194a3fe741238ab0/thumbnail_1145000.jpg","/articles/6183949/Coffee-County/Tennessee/Coffee-County-BZA-allows-Ilner-to-use-historic-10foot-Cross-Creek-access-despite-neighbor-objections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183949-29b691ba9655141e295fd786921efb46/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440102&Signature=izQLWRve~oXbFalXU1PkEtwuNiNGBrwPVPhAeDQzh34PaLElfJQ7c7RnkLx9kC83GXZc1uMG3XgdzppZbC2GW14IRGhyGbRssvUqOiiaVERiOeOY6SQ470uvbDnZEDsvRMq~MIcKIuQUWKLZKnnzSzJB9d~1YywwvczYly8zNbUNZ1Sn6RbkE09zqY2xA14L6DGMJ1NpRzHq9VSRF01MvHuRl75Cl5DwMyLXagMnrK9hB6r3nmgEcyyFpJ6hDUvYaiPs2w4mYf2uCzWWU-fe0YSDcjP3CGtig~gVcoP1LizoLyFs3HhZRcpuTd4bZEdVnZgOG5F6ETaM1hbAmLfh4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Zoning Appeals of Coffee County voted 5‑0 June 26 to allow Arnold \"Arno\" Ilner to pursue a building permit using a 10‑foot access along Cross Creek Drive to reach a landlocked parcel.

The decision follows a long, often emotional hearing in which neighbors and Ilner family members presented maps, excavation bids and a 2024 court decision that the board discussed as the governing legal background. Supporters said the narrow access has historically served the lower portion of the Ilner farm; opponents said granting any variance beyond the court’s limited easement would unduly burden adjacent property owners.

Arno Ilner and supporters said the roadbed has long served the lower portion of the family farm and that a 10‑foot access is the only feasible way to rebuild a small house where an earlier home once stood. Nick Northcutt, who accompanied Ilner at the podium, said, “This road has been there for over a hundred years,” and shared TVA maps showing the drive’s historical presence. Ilner said he had received bids to build a road into the parcel and that the site contains one of the few flat places left on the lower farm where a small house could be rebuilt.

Several neighbors strongly opposed the request. Faye Coleman, whose land adjoins the proposed access, described repeated damage and traffic she said resulted when equipment was driven toward the parcel and urged the board not to expand the court’s ruling. “I pray this board will not override the court order,” Coleman said, adding she was concerned for children who play near the creek and for the day‑to‑day farming access to her property.

Records submitted at the hearing and read aloud in public comment show two excavation bids discussed at length: an original bid from Martin Excavating of about $79,600 and a second bid from Gary Vickers (Vickers Excavating) of roughly $65,000. Coleman and others said those bids show early planning by the parcel’s siblings to provide access without burdening her land; Ilner supporters said the bids demonstrate that alternatives were explored and that the 10‑foot access remains the practical route.

The board noted a 2024 chancery‑court finding that recognized historical use of the drive and awarded a 10‑foot easement to Ilner’s parcel; the judge’s written ruling was discussed during public comment. TVA’s ownership of an initial 700‑foot segment of right of way also factored into the discussion, with speakers saying TVA had previously granted a 10‑foot access and that any expansion would require federal approval.

Board members asked clarifying questions about fire flow, lot sizes and whether the parcel in question qualified as a lot of record. Staff confirmed hydrant flow measurements above 500 gallons per minute for nearby hydrants and said septic permitting and other site requirements would remain subject to county and state review.

After discussion, a motion to approve the variance passed 5‑0. The motion and vote allow Ilner to proceed toward obtaining a building permit consistent with the existing 10‑foot access and subject to any additional county and state permitting requirements.

The action resolves the variance request before the board but leaves unresolved the broader dispute among family members and neighbors about alternative road options, historical subdivision choices and the extent to which the board may act in light of recent court findings. Coleman and other opponents indicated they could pursue civil remedies related to deed restrictions or other claims; the board noted civil matters fall outside its purview.","The Board of Zoning Appeals voted 5‑0 to permit Arnold (Arno) Ilner to seek a building permit using an existing 10‑foot access along Cross Creek Drive after a contested hearing in which neighbor Faye Coleman urged the board not to override a court order.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

BZA approves multiple variances, including lakeside setback and access variances for several landowners

Coffee County BZA grants special exemption for three duplexes on Old Seminary Road despite widespread neighbor opposition

Coffee County BZA allows Ilner to use historic 10‑foot Cross Creek access despite neighbor objections