Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Knoxville BZA Approves Reduced Lot‑Width Variance for 32‑Unit Townhouse Proposal
Summary
The City Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance reducing the required lot width per townhouse from 20 feet to 9.5 feet, clearing the way for a proposed 32‑unit townhouse development on a challenging 3.95‑acre parcel with floodplain and topographic constraints.
The City Board of Zoning Appeals on Monday approved a variance that would reduce the minimum lot width per townhouse dwelling unit from 20 feet to 9.5 feet, allowing a developer to pursue a proposed 32‑unit townhouse project.
Planning staff told the board the request would allow the proposed density shown on the submitted site plan and that the property’s configuration required an interpretation of the front property line to measure lot width. Staff described the variance as a request to “decrease the minimum required lot width per townhouse dwelling unit from 20 feet to 9.5 feet.”
Engineer Adam Comtop, representing the developer, said the 3.95‑acre site has several constraints that limit buildable area. “We’re looking to develop 32 townhouses,” he said, adding the lot has approximately 22 feet of elevation change between Gallagher View and the proposed building pad, a stream with FEMA‑mapped floodplain and a no‑fill zone that pushed the buildable area away from the right‑of‑way.
Comtop also told the board the site’s depth and existing right‑of‑way geometry make conventional frontage calculations difficult; using the zoning department’s interpretation of the front property line produced a lot width of 304.5 feet and the proposed density shown on the site plan.
Board members questioned the sequencing of approvals — whether a BZA variance would be effective only if the subsequent planning commission special‑use approval is granted — and discussed alternatives, including building a public street or changing unit types. Chair Amy Sherrill noted the board requires three votes in favor to grant a variance; after discussion, a board member moved to approve BZA250059 “as submitted on the basis of the discussion,” a motion seconded by Daniel O’Dell and adopted by unanimous voice vote.
The approval does not eliminate later land‑use reviews. Planning commission action will still be required for any density that exceeds the by‑right allowances of the RM‑4 zoning district, and the applicant acknowledged that additional approvals and permitting remain necessary before construction can begin.
Next procedural steps: the applicant will pursue the planning review required for the proposed density and any required permits.
