Citizen Portal

ZBA tables variance request for 3735 East M-21 amid frontage, precedent concerns

Clinton County Zoning Board of Appeals · July 21, 2026

Summary

The Clinton County Zoning Board of Appeals on July 21 tabled a variance request from Patrick and Bonnie Sanborn for 3735 East M-21 after discussion about a 20.02-foot shortfall in required road frontage and township concerns about setting a precedent.

The Clinton County Zoning Board of Appeals on July 21 voted to table a decision on a variance request that would allow a non-conforming lot split at 3735 East M-21 in Bingham Township.

Interim Planning & Zoning Director Kristen Hatfield presented the request (ZC-03-26, PVR260003), explaining the applicants, Patrick and Bonnie Sanborn, seek a variance to Section 3.1.2(D) of the A-2 zoning district to create a lot with 309.98 feet of road frontage—20.02 feet short of the 330-foot requirement. The parcel is identified as parcel #030-012-400-010-50 in Section 12 of Bingham Township. "My goal is to split 10-acres from my property and sell it," the minutes record Patrick Sanborn saying when the board opened the public hearing.

Board members probed drainage and precedent issues. Todd Meadows, submitting a written comment, urged the board to adhere to the 330-foot frontage rule. Vice-Chair Kathleen George said she had spoken with Bingham Township Supervisor John Weber, who "expressed concerns with setting a precedence by approving this variance." Mark Winsor said he favors avoiding long, narrow "bowling alley" parcels and voiced support for the variance request, while Chair Greg Armbrustmacher said each variance presents unique circumstances.

After discussion, Kathleen George moved, supported by Keith Jones, to table the application to allow staff and the board to assemble additional information needed to evaluate the seven basic criteria in §7.20(F)(1) and the three special conditions in §7.20(F)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance. The motion carried by roll call vote 4-1; Mark Winsor cast the lone dissent. The board did not approve or deny the variance at the meeting and left the matter open for further review.

AI generated

The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.

AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.

Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

Source