Commissioners approve final plat for two‑lot subdivision on McIntyre Road (DEV 25‑084)
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Leavenworth County Commission conditionally approved the final plat for case DEV 25‑084, a two‑lot subdivision at 16730 McIntyre Road.
Planning staff described the proposal as dividing a developed 10‑acre parcel into two lots of five acres or larger, using the existing driveway under a cross‑access easement and placing an accessory structure on a separate lot temporarily. Staff identified three required exceptions: lot‑line geometry under Article 50 Section 43(d) (line breaks), a nonconforming structure issue under Article 50 Section 43(h) (accessory structure split from principal structure), and a lot width‑to‑depth ratio under Article 50 Section 43(i). The Planning Commission recommended approval by an 8–0 vote and approved all three exceptions.
A motion to approve the final plat “as outlined in case DEV 25‑084” and subject to staff and Planning Commission conditions carried; the public record shows the motion was seconded and the board voted in the affirmative. Commissioners recorded “Aye” during roll call for the motion.
The approval is conditional on the requirements set forth in the staff report and the Planning Commission recommendation; staff and the applicant will complete any outstanding conditions before final recording.
Planning staff described the proposal as dividing a developed 10‑acre parcel into two lots of five acres or larger, using the existing driveway under a cross‑access easement and placing an accessory structure on a separate lot temporarily. Staff identified three required exceptions: lot‑line geometry under Article 50 Section 43(d) (line breaks), a nonconforming structure issue under Article 50 Section 43(h) (accessory structure split from principal structure), and a lot width‑to‑depth ratio under Article 50 Section 43(i). The Planning Commission recommended approval by an 8–0 vote and approved all three exceptions.
A motion to approve the final plat “as outlined in case DEV 25‑084” and subject to staff and Planning Commission conditions carried; the public record shows the motion was seconded and the board voted in the affirmative. Commissioners recorded “Aye” during roll call for the motion.
The approval is conditional on the requirements set forth in the staff report and the Planning Commission recommendation; staff and the applicant will complete any outstanding conditions before final recording.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting