Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission recommends wide-ranging text amendments to county zoning and subdivision regulations
Summary
The Planning Commission voted 5–0 to recommend a package of language amendments to the 2006 Leavenworth County Zoning and Subdivision Regulations (case DEV‑25‑132), including changes to how front setbacks are measured, a proposed 75‑foot front building setback baseline, limits on R‑1 zoning locations, revised SUP transfer rules, and clarifications to cul‑de‑sac/curved‑lot frontage measurement.
The Leavenworth County Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend a series of language amendments (DEV‑25‑132) to the county’s 2006 Zoning and Subdivision Regulations following staff presentation and a public hearing.
Major provisions in the draft amendments presented to the commission included:
- Article 4: housekeeping to add established zoning districts (PR1, PR2, PR3, PC, PI, MXD) that were omitted from an earlier list. - Article 5: change front building setback measurement from the road centerline to the road right‑of‑way/property line, and set a new baseline front‑building setback of 75 feet for future unplatted parcels (staff said this would not retroactively change existing recorded subdivision setbacks). - Article 7: codify that R‑1 (one‑family dwelling) zoning may be applied only within 1,500 feet of a city limit line to concentrate higher densities near cities. - Article 22 (SUP): require a new owner to notify Planning within 60 days with proof of ownership to continue an SUP; absent notification the SUP becomes void; clarify automatic termination after 12 months cessation of activity and administrative review mechanisms. - Article 50 and related sections: codify how lot width/frontage is calculated on curved roads and cul‑de‑sacs (measure at building setback line where applicable while ensuring a minimum property‑line frontage threshold; staff proposed 50% for cul‑de‑sac lots and 20% for curved road lots but commissioners asked staff to flip or refine those percentages based on the public discussion).
At the public hearing, surveyor Joe Herring and other commenters supported measuring setbacks from the right‑of‑way but urged reducing the proposed 75‑foot figure to 65 feet in recognition of earlier county right‑of‑way dedications (many local lots were created when the county required 40‑foot rights‑of‑way). Staff and commissioners discussed enforcement, possible variance uses for existing nonconformities, and whether the language should distinguish arterials/collectors for setback calculations. Commissioners asked staff to refine cul‑de‑sac and curved‑road percentage language before BOCC consideration.
A motion to accept the draft package (with spelling fixes and the agreed editorial adjustments to cul‑de‑sac/curved percentages) passed on a 5–0 roll‑call vote. The commission will forward the recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for final action (BOCC date recorded in the minutes).
