Leavenworth County planning panel recommends three subdivision plats to county commissioners

The Leavenworth County Planning Commission on a unanimous vote recommended three preliminary and final plats for consideration by the Board of County Commissioners and approved associated exceptions for setbacks and lot‑dimension rules.

Planning staff presented DEV‑26‑021/22, a preliminary and final plat for property at 21431 163rd Street that would split the parcel into two lots using a north–south cross‑access easement. Planning staff said the application required two exceptions: an accessory structure located inside the proposed 40‑foot southern building setback and a lot depth‑to‑width ratio issue for Lot 1 caused by the easement layout. “With the exception of those two exceptions, it is compliant,” planning staff said in the staff report. The applicant’s agent, Crystal (Alison Consulting), told the commission the drive will be removed and replaced with a private drive terminating in a cul‑de‑sac and acknowledged the shed on Lot 1 must be removed if it is damaged more than 51 percent. The commission approved both exceptions and recommended the plat to the Board of County Commissioners by roll call vote; the BOCC will consider the item no earlier than April 22, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. at the Leavenworth County Courthouse.

The commission also recommended approval of DEV‑26‑023/24 (Daphner Estates, 18735 Metro Avenue), a three‑lot subdivision that includes an accessory‑structure exception for a large barn on the center lot and an access/fee clarification tied to the property’s accessory dwelling unit. Planning staff noted the property had been rezoned to R2.5 and that floodplain and fee adjustments were part of the record. Commissioners voted to approve the exception and forward the plat to the BOCC.

Finally, the commission approved DEV‑26‑033, a track‑split exception in which staff identified a lot depth:width ratio exceeding the typical 1:1 standard by roughly 230 feet for Track 1. Applicant Joe Herring (surveying) explained the proposed split follows an existing fence line so farming operations and existing structures remain on the larger track. Commissioners discussed that staff does not make recommendations on exceptions and approved the requested variance on a unanimous roll call.

All of the planning commission votes on the three cases were recorded as unanimous in favor. The planning commission’s recommendation does not adopt final plat approvals; each case is scheduled for the county commissioners’ public consideration at the date and time announced. The planning commission meeting then adjourned and members moved to the Board of Zoning Appeals items later in the evening.