Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves track-split exception for Berg property
Summary
The Leavenworth County Planning Commission granted a track-split exception for case DEV24-149 (Berg), approving an exception to Article 50 Section 40.3.i for lot depth-to-width ratio by unanimous vote, 7–0.
The Leavenworth County Planning Commission approved an exception for a proposed track split on a through lot known in the record as case DEV24-149 (Berg) by a 7–0 roll-call vote.
Planning staff told commissioners the parcel (identified in the staff report as 30197170 Fifth Street) is a through lot with road frontage on both the front and rear property lines and that the applicant’s proposed split would create a nonconforming lot that fails the lot depth-to-width standard in the county zoning and subdivision regulations. Planning staff noted a floodplain and a power line bisect the property and said those features could affect future subdivision of the remainder. Planning staff also noted the applicant (a surveying firm represented in the packet by Mr. Herring) was not in attendance but had submitted a narrative for consideration.
The commission’s motion to approve the exception cited that the three criteria required for an exception had been met. A roll-call vote recorded Jaden Bailey, Alan Stewart, William Gaston, Jeff Spink, Doug Tystead, Steve Rosenthal and Dan Clemens voting yes; the motion carried 7–0.
Why it matters: The approval permits a split that staff described as creating a lot that does not comply with the lot depth-to-width ratio in Article 50 Section 40.3.i of the county Zoning and Subdivision Regulations. Staff had recommended against the request but the commission determined the exception criteria were satisfied.
Commission discussion focused on access and future entrances. Commissioners asked whether existing driveways would become shared easements or whether new access points could be created; planning staff said property owners could record an access easement with the register of deeds to formalize shared use and that because the roadway involved is a local road, there is sufficient room for another entrance on the southern parcel. The record does not show any amendment to the motion.
The approval is limited to the exception requested for case DEV24-149; no additional approvals (final plats, driveway permits, or other development approvals) were granted in this action.
