Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Road Frontage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants road‑frontage variance to split 2.501‑acre lot at 5400 W. Highway 42, requires maintenance agreement
Summary
The Oldham County Board of Adjustments approved a requested road‑frontage variance on March 6 to create a 2.501‑acre parcel from a larger tract at 5400 West Highway 42 in Goshen, with requirements that a minor plat and a road‑maintenance agreement be recorded before permits are issued.
The Oldham County Board of Adjustments approved on March 6 a road‑frontage variance to permit creation of a 2.501‑acre lot from a larger tract at 5400 West Highway 42 in Goshen. The board attached conditions including submission of a minor plat for staff approval and a road‑maintenance agreement governing the existing shared access drive.
Background and request
John Hine of Oldham County Planning and Development told the board the applicant proposes to divide a parent tract and create a new 2.501‑acre lot that would have zero feet of direct road frontage on Highway 42; agricultural‑zoned lots of 2.5 acres or greater require 300 feet of road frontage under county rules. Hine said create‑and‑split would therefore require a 300‑foot road‑frontage variance.
Site history and prior approvals
Hine reminded the board that the same parent property previously received a road‑frontage variance in 1994 for a parcel and that, more recently, the Oldham County Planning Commission granted an access‑easement waiver allowing a fourth parcel to be served by the shared access easement. The planning commission vote on the access easement waiver passed 8‑0 on Jan. 28, 2025.
Applicant testimony and access arrangements
Applicant Jeff Wattsroy told the board the property is a family farm and said the land division was intended in part to provide funds for family long‑term care. He said the access is a privately owned drive that runs from Highway 42 into the farm; historically the drive served multiple family parcels and is not used as public roadway. Wattsroy acknowledged the need for a formal agreement covering maintenance responsibilities for the private drive and said he expected to execute such an agreement if the variance were approved.
Board conditions and rationale
Board members approved the variance with three binding conditions: (1) the road‑frontage variance applies only to the lot configuration presented at the March 6 hearing; (2) a minor plat and survey must be submitted to and approved by planning staff before any building permits may be issued; and (3) a road‑maintenance agreement must be recorded addressing the privately shared access drive and responsibilities for upkeep. Board members said the road‑maintenance agreement is important to avoid future disputes among family owners and to protect public safety and access.
Outcome and next steps
The board approved the variance and included the road‑maintenance agreement requirement to be completed before any permits are issued. Staff said the applicant must submit the minor plat to planning staff for review and that the recorded maintenance agreement should be in place to establish long‑term responsibilities for the private drive.
Ending
The variance clears the way for the proposed lot split subject to the plat and the recorded access‑maintenance agreement; staff will process the minor plat and verify the maintenance instrument before any development permits are issued for the new parcel.
