Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Lot Split topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marshall County BZA OKs variance to split 5.34‑acre parcel into 1.5‑acre and 3.84‑acre lots
Summary
The Marshall County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing John and Sandra Mumm to split a 5.34‑acre parcel into a 1.5‑acre lot and a 3.84‑acre lot, despite the county density standard that generally requires 5‑acre minimums for new lots.
John and Sandra Mumm received approval June 10 from the Marshall County Board of Zoning Appeals to split a 5.34‑acre parcel at 9273 Tyler Road into a 1.5‑acre lot and a remaining 3.84‑acre parcel.
The board’s decision grants a variance from the county’s density requirement; staff and the Technical Review Committee recommended approval after applying the findings of fact required by state statute on public health, safety and welfare, use and value, and practical difficulty.
“Basically, it's another lot we're building,” John Mumm, the applicant, told the board, adding the split would make a small lot more workable for local farming operations and that the new lot “would be for our daughter and son‑in‑law.” Nicholas (staff planner) summarized staff findings that the proposed sizes are consistent with surrounding agricultural residential parcels and that strict application of the ordinance would create practical difficulties for the property’s use.
The board opened and closed the public hearing. The record included a supportive letter from neighbors Joseph and Becky (last name in record: Mumm) stating the proposal “does not present any issues and is respectful of our community and land.”
Board members voted on a motion to approve based on the staff findings. The recorded votes were: Mr. Bennett — yes; Mr. Billing — yes; Mr. Augustus — no. The motion carried and the variance was approved; because three affirmative votes are normally required when the full five‑member body is not present, the board discussed that a different vote outcome could have required the case to be tabled until a later meeting.
The board did not attach additional conditions to the approval. The board’s discussion noted questions about how lot‑split rules have changed over time and that similar splits have been allowed in other circumstances, but members stressed that each request is judged against the statutory findings of fact.
The Mumm parcel split is authorized as a variance; any future subdivision or other development will remain subject to county subdivision and zoning rules and to any health‑department requirements if additional septic or wells are proposed.
