Oldham County planning commission forwards updated comprehensive plan to legislative bodies amid farmland and zoning concerns

Oldham County officials voted to forward the county’s updated comprehensive plan to the legislative bodies and the fiscal court for consideration and adoption after a planning commission meeting where residents raised concerns about weak land-use language and minimum lot sizes.

The vote to recommend the plan passed 8–1 with one abstention. Miss Davis, a planning commission member, moved to send the plan on as presented; Miss Jones seconded and asked that edits proposed at the meeting be incorporated into the motion. The motion passed by roll call: Allison voted no; Miller abstained; all other members voted yes.

The vote follows public comment from residents and local officials who urged stronger protections for farmland and clearer regulatory language. Amanda Dreckman, a resident of 3020 Pioneer Place in Crestwood, said the plan’s use of “loose words such as should and encourage” weakens its value as a guide for zoning and subdivision rules. “It makes it a weak guideline for the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinances,” Dreckman said.

Constable Barry Laws, of District 3, told the commission the plan lacks specifics and implementation timelines outside the transportation section. “There’s no specifics,” Laws said, adding that sections with dates and clear actions are easier to rely on for implementation.

Other commenters pushed for larger minimum lot sizes on agricultural and conservation-zoned land. Dreckman said allowing one-acre lots on agricultural land has led to undesirable growth and suggested a maximum density of one house per 8.5 acres; she cited other counties with larger minimums, saying some set five-acre minima and noting that in one county cited during comment the agricultural minimum was 30 acres. The transcript indicates those examples were offered as comparison rather than as county policy for Oldham County.

During the commission’s deliberations, a staff member cited Kentucky Revised Statutes 100.197(2), advising the commission that the comprehensive plan elements must be reviewed at least once every five years and, if amended, should be submitted to legislative bodies and the fiscal court for consideration and adoption. That staff member outlined three options for the commission: not recommend the plan as drafted, recommend it as drafted, or recommend it with suggested amendments.

Miss Lowry, speaking during the public comment period, described herself as “middle ground,” saying she supported inclusion of conservation easements and recognition of green space but opposed the plan’s lack of stringent development rules. Several planning commission members and staff acknowledged the work completed on the plan while also noting commenters’ requests for more prescriptive language in certain sections.

In roll call remarks, Planning Commission member Miller said he would abstain because he had joined the commission shortly before the plan was brought to the commission and did not feel able to fully judge the document. The commission recorded the formal approval as “Duckett PZ-25-028,” approved by motion of eight yes votes, one no and one abstention.

The plan will now go to the affected cities, the legislative bodies and the fiscal court for their review and potential adoption; the meeting record did not specify dates or timelines for those next steps.