Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fiscal court adopts tighter subdivision rules, drops planning commission waiver for sidewalks and curbs
Summary
The court adopted an ordinance amending subdivision regulations to require curbs, gutters and sidewalks in new subdivisions and to revise final‑plat and fee submission rules; the planning commission’s ability to waive sidewalks was removed.
McCracken County Fiscal Court voted on April 14 to adopt an ordinance that amends the county’s subdivision regulations to require curbs, gutters and sidewalks for new subdivisions and to change final‑plat approval and fee submission rules.
The ordinance (referred to in court as ordinance number 2025‑04) was presented in summary format pursuant to KRS Chapter 67. The changes amend the final plat approval section, address developer self‑funded certifications, require curbs and gutters and sidewalks within developments and remove the planning commission’s authority to waive sidewalks. The fee schedule was adjusted to add a full site plan submission rule and to eliminate certain hard‑copy submission requirements.
Supporters said the changes implement goals from the county’s recently adopted comprehensive plan to improve walkability and connectivity and to ensure consistent infrastructure in subdivisions. Judge Clymer and other commissioners argued that sidewalks to nowhere would exist until the county started requiring sidewalks and that curbs and gutters are needed for long‑term roadway durability and potential county adoption.
Opponents, including some planning commissioners at the meeting, warned the requirements increase upfront development costs and said the planning commission had historically granted waivers. Commissioners debated exceptions for subdivisions with existing phases; the final ordinance preserves the ability for later phases of already‑constructed subdivisions to remain consistent with earlier phases rather than impose sidewalks retroactively.
The court completed the ordinance’s second reading in summary form, moved to adopt and, after discussion, voted in favor. The court record shows the motion passed unanimously. The ordinance will be available for public inspection in full at the judge executive’s office.
Ending: The court directed county staff and the planning commission to implement the ordinance changes and to coordinate with the county engineer on technical standards and enforcement.
