Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables homeowners' request to add garage at 1301 Sunrise Drive amid sightline concerns
Summary
The City of Knoxville Board of Adjustment on March 11, 2026 tabled a variance request from Wayne and Karol Little for a 24'x28' garage addition at 1301 Sunrise Drive that would encroach two feet into the corner side yard; commissioners cited intersection sightline and asked for a site visit.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The City of Knoxville Board of Adjustment on March 11, 2026 tabled a variance request from Wayne and Karol Little to build a 24'x28' garage addition at 1301 Sunrise Drive that would encroach two feet into the corner side yard adjacent to W Larson Street. The motion to table was made by Geoff Wheelock and seconded; the roll-call vote was Ayes: Linda Hicks, Deborah Tupper, Geoff Wheelock; Nay: Tara Gordon; Absent: Jerry Jones.
Planning & Zoning Administrator Nathan Parch told the board the proposed 24'x28' addition would extend two feet into the corner side yard, reducing the required 15-foot corner side yard to 13 feet, and would provide garage space adjacent to the existing two-car attached garage. Parch said the northeast portion of the property is steep and wooded, limiting buildable area, and pointed to an existing 24'x24' accessory building as another constraint. He reported the distance between the side of the house facing W Larson Street and the sidewalk is about 37 feet and that the applicant prefers a standard 24-foot garage width rather than reducing the width to 22 feet.
Board member Deborah Tupper raised specific concerns that the addition could impair sightlines for motorists or pedestrians at the adjacent intersection. Chair Linda Hicks asked whether the owners had considered alternate locations or shrinking the addition by two feet to meet the corner side yard requirement. Several commissioners said they were unfamiliar with the site and requested a board visit before a final decision.
No public comments opposing the request were recorded; Parch said letters were mailed to 12 surrounding property owners and that no neighbors had contacted staff with questions or objections. The board agreed to revisit the application at a future meeting following a site visit and additional review.
