Knox County BZA defers floodplain variance for accessory structures after technical and safety concerns

The Knox County Board of Zoning Appeals on July 2026 voted to defer for 60 days a variance request from Caitlin Eade that would have allowed two accessory structures — a 10-by-10 chicken coop and a 12-by-24 shed — on land identified by county maps as floodplain at 8545 Creek Valley Lane.

The board’s action came after technical testimony from Drew Thurman, Knox County Engineering and Public Works floodplain manager, and extended questioning from members about public-safety risks, FEMA compliance and possible alternatives. Thurman told the board that the FEMA 100‑year base flood elevation for the neighborhood is “around 960 feet above sea level” and that the subdivision’s minimum finished-floor elevation is 963 feet, meaning the structures as sited would fall below required elevations without either a variance or significant mitigation.

Eade, who described the property as a 3.6-acre hobby-farm and said the structures are set on blocks with no permanent foundation, urged the board for relief. “We have a 10-by-10 chicken coop and a 12-by-24 shed on our property,” Eade said, adding the structures have no utilities and that the owners had offered to sign an assumption-of-liability. “We feel like we’ve exhausted all of our options, which is why we’re here requesting the variance today.”

Thurman said the main technical constraints are a mapped no‑fill line and the county’s elevation standards. “The FEMA base flood … is around 960 feet,” Thurman said. “The minimum floor elevation for that neighborhood when it was permitted is 963. If the shed and the chicken coop were placed north of the no‑fill line and raised to 963, then you will not need a variance.” He also cautioned that the lower area is a no‑fill zone, meaning bringing in fill to raise elevations is not permitted without separate engineering study and approvals.

Board members pressed for alternatives. One member noted the risk that a structure dislodged in a flood could become debris and obstruct culverts or bridges downstream; Chair Paul Huff said, “One of the biggest reasons that floodways flood is debris being caught under bridges and culverts,” and cautioned the owner about potential liability. Staff and Thurman advised the applicant to consult a hydrologist or civil engineer, perform a no‑rise or other technical study if appropriate, evaluate moving the structures north of the no‑fill line, or consider elevation/anchoring solutions and flood vents where code permits.

After extended discussion, the board voted to defer the request for 60 days and asked Eade to work with Thurman and staff on a compliance plan that might remove the need for relief or narrow the variance sought. The board said a follow-up analysis and any engineered documentation should be presented at the next appearance.

The board did not grant an exemption from FEMA or county floodplain requirements; members reiterated that they cannot approve proposals that would clearly violate FEMA elevation or the county’s no‑fill protections without proper engineering justification. The item will return for consideration after the applicant provides additional technical work and staff recommendations.