Developer reduces Rose Island subdivision from 94 to 64 lots after court ruling; neighbors press for traffic and water access answers

The second case, TRC26‑012 (Rose Island Road subdivision), focused on a long‑running application that the applicant described as beginning in 2021. John Talbot explained the project's history: a prior rezoning was approved, an appeal followed, and the applicant decided to remove lots that would have fallen within a mandatory sewer‑connection radius, reducing the prior 94‑lot plan to 64 lots.

Staff again walked through technical requirements. John Hine requested plan sheets showing water mains, sanitary sewers (if any), gas, fire hydrants, utilities (overhead and underground), and curved front‑lot distances for lots in the CO1 conservation and R2 districts to demonstrate compliance or to identify the need for variances. Agencies reminded the applicant to submit a preliminary plan for Planning Commission consideration and to include any requests for concurrent variances.

Permitting and infrastructure issues were raised. Jim Sullivan said the development exceeds one acre of disturbance and requires an Oldham County stormwater quality and erosion control permit and a KYR10 land‑disturbance permit from the Kentucky Division of Water. He noted mapped jurisdictional streams on the site and that any detention basins in or near mapped streams will need Army Corps and state concurrence or permitting; the applicant must submit calculations showing basin performance and downstream culvert capacity. Louisville MSD and Louisville Water provided standard letters noting existing infrastructure near the site but stressing that letters do not constitute service approval.

Neighbors pressed for clarity on access and safety. Jay Kuzma, who lives at the end of South Rose Island Road, told the panel he lacks city water and asked whether the developer would provide an easement so a water line could be extended; the applicant and engineer said they would be willing to consider providing an easement. Dan Weaver, a long‑time resident, requested an updated traffic study and described Rose Island Road as narrow and unsafe for additional construction traffic; he questioned whether the half‑mile sewer radius was measured as a straight radius versus actual pipe routing. The applicant said survey crews located manholes for measurements and that the lot reductions were intended to avoid the sewer‑connection waiver issue.

Next steps: staff will continue technical review and expect a formal preliminary subdivision plan submittal and any requested variances at the Planning Commission. The TRC provided written comments to the applicant and reiterated that many items (detention basin design, construction standards, exact traffic improvements) will be vetted further during construction plan review and at Commission hearings. No approvals or conditions were adopted at the TRC.