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.