Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lot Sizes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners told zoning and wastewater codes disagree on minimum lot sizes; staff to update regulations
Summary
Staff flagged inconsistencies between Sedgwick County zoning/subdivision regulations and the wastewater code (4.5-acre vs 3-acre lagoon minimums) and noted SF20/SF10 districts are tied to urban growth areas; MABCD technical guidance and peer-county comparisons prompted a staff commitment to update codes.
Sedgwick County commissioners were told Thursday that county zoning, subdivision and wastewater codes currently contain mismatched minimum-lot and wastewater standards that staff will move to reconcile.
Scott, a county planner, walked commissioners through how zoning purpose statements and subdivision rules treat on-site water and wastewater. He said the subdivision regulations currently list a 4.5-acre minimum for sewage lagoons but the county’s recently revised wastewater (sanitary) code—approved and finalized in 2022—sets a 3-acre minimum that may be reduced to 2 acres with appropriate approvals.
‘‘One of those is behind and needs to be updated,’’ Scott said, adding that staff would pursue updates so the zoning and wastewater codes match. Commissioner David noted aloud, ‘‘4.5 is outdated,’’ and staff agreed the wastewater code’s 3-acre standard reflects changed technology and recent code decisions.
MABCD technical staff (Tim Wagner) told commissioners that lagoon systems are often preferred in the county’s soils and that lateral-field septic systems typically require one acre; lagoons can be feasible on smaller lots depending on soil type, lot shape, building footprint and setbacks. Tim said the county sometimes reduces lagoon acreages to two acres where newer lagoon technologies and site layouts allow it.
Scott also noted that some single-family zoning districts—SF20 and SF10—are written with an emphasis on urban growth areas, meaning those districts were intended for locations where municipal services are expected; that alignment affects what minimum lot sizes make sense in unincorporated rural areas. Staff presented a short survey of peer counties showing wide variation in rural minimums (examples included Johnson County and Riley County) and advised commissioners that further harmonization of definitions and purpose statements in the comprehensive plan and zoning code may be needed.
Commissioners did not adopt any code changes at the meeting. Staff committed to initiate the code updates to align zoning/subdivision language with the wastewater code and to return with draft amendments and technical clarifications for commissioners to consider.
