Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Accessory Apartment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves conditional use for accessory apartment on rural residential parcel near Derby
Summary
The county commission approved a conditional use permit to allow an accessory apartment (a second dwelling) at a 39‑acre rural residential parcel in Derby’s urban influence area; the county followed the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission recommendation and confirmed no protests were filed.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Accessory Apartment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board of County Commissioners voted 5–0 on June 25 to approve a conditional use permit (CON 2025‑560) allowing an accessory apartment on a rural residential property west of Greenwich Road and about one-half mile south of East 79th Street South in Sedgwick County’s Derby urban‑influence area.
Scott Weidl of the Planning Department presented the case. The property owner proposed building a single‑family house while retaining a dwelling unit within an existing “barndominium” on the same 39‑acre parcel. Weidl said both the Derby Planning Commission and the Wichita‑Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission recommended approval; the difference between the recommendations related to whether to waive a supplementary‑use regulation that requires design compatibility between the units. No public protests were filed.
Commissioner Howe moved to approve the conditional use following Derby’s Planning Commission recommendation; the board approved the motion by roll call with all five members voting yes. In discussion, Howe said the proposed structures appeared compatible with the surrounding high‑end residential area. Planning staff noted that the Unified Zoning Code treats the request as an accessory apartment to permit two dwelling units on one lot under the presented site plan.
There was no public testimony at the county hearing; the commission briefly discussed ex parte contacts and confirmed no commissioners had had ex parte communications about the case.

