Oldham County fiscal court approves zoning change for proposed Buckner family entertainment center

The Oldham County Fiscal Court on March 4 approved an ordinance rezoning a 2.23‑acre parcel on North Highway 393 in Buckner from I‑2 Heavy Industrial to C‑3 General Business to allow construction of a proposed 19,267‑square‑foot family entertainment center.

The zoning change (Ordinance KOC 25‑920‑081) was put forward by Jamf Enterprises LLC and recommended to the fiscal court by the Oldham County Planning Commission after a lengthy review and a December 10 planning‑commission hearing. Planning staff and the applicant described the facility as containing indoor multiuse courts (primarily for pickleball), a fenced outdoor games/lawn area, a playground and a café with a drive‑through lane. Planning Director Ryan Fisher told the court the planning commission recommended approval of the zoning map amendment and associated waivers and approved the preliminary development plan.

Why it matters: the rezoning permits a business‑oriented use on land currently designated industrial, altering the regulatory framework for setbacks, parking and other site requirements. The project’s proponents said it would create local recreation options and jobs; opponents and some magistrates said the location — directly across KY‑393 from Oldham County High School — raises pedestrian‑safety and traffic concerns that merit attention.

Planning, review and waivers Mike Swansberg, attorney for Jamf Enterprises, described a multi‑year review process in which the applicant met repeatedly with county staff, the Technical Review Committee and the public before the December Planning Commission meeting, where the commission recommended approval by an 8–5 vote. Swansberg said the application also sought and the planning commission granted multiple waivers at the December hearing: a 10‑foot vehicular use landscape buffer waiver, waivers for interior landscape areas in two portions of the parking lot, and a waiver of the maximum impervious surface for the parking area. The preliminary development plan itself was approved by the commission by a 13–0 vote.

Developer Adam McIntyre, who identified himself as one of the Jamf partners and the project architect/developer, said the design was revised in response to public input and agency review. “We bought this piece of property years ago with the vision to actually do something that we would like to visit,” McIntyre said, and described the facility as “sports‑forward” and intended to provide activities residents currently travel to Jefferson County to find.

Public testimony and court questions Resident Blake Haselton and others spoke in opposition at the public hearing, focusing on pedestrian exposure given the site’s proximity to the high‑school campus. Haselton said the location was “the wrong location” for an entertainment center given the number of young students nearby and the absence of a marked crosswalk.

Magistrates and staff asked for numeric and technical details during the court’s question period. Ryan Silliman, county engineer, read the parking count from the plans as 93 spaces. The applicant and engineer said the parking area is designed to keep patrons on site and that the Transportation Cabinet reviewed traffic materials and raised no objection; a traffic assessment submitted during review concluded projected peak‑hour trips were below the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet threshold that would trigger a full traffic‑impact study. The court heard that the applicant had removed an earlier brewery concept and reconceived the project as an entertainment facility; the applicant acknowledged there is still an intent to allow on‑premises alcohol service tied to food, subject to local and state approvals.

Binding element and court decision The fiscal court approved the rezoning ordinance after a motion to adopt the second reading. The court added one explicit binding element accepted by the applicant: if an ABC (alcoholic beverage) license is later issued for the site, “there shall be no alcohol advertising visible from the exterior of the building.” The applicant agreed the restriction could be included. Magistrates debated, but ultimately rejected, a proposed additional binding element that would have required a four‑board fence along the front of the property; staff said that fences near the state right‑of‑way and existing utility easements may not be feasible without further coordination with KYTC and utilities. The motion to adopt the ordinance passed 7–2.

Details and clarifications - Parcel and building: 2.23 acres; proposed building 19,267 sq. ft. (developer presentation). - Parking shown on submitted plans: 93 spaces (county engineer’s reading of plan). - Planning Commission: initial recommendation to approve zoning map amendment on Dec. 10 (vote 8–5); preliminary development plan approved 13–0 at the same hearing. - Waivers approved by Planning Commission: vehicular use landscape buffer, interior landscape areas, maximum impervious surface for parking (records in staff packet). - Alcohol: applicant removed an original brewery concept; the current plan anticipates possible on‑premises alcohol service tied to food and subject to ABC approval; the court required no exterior alcohol advertising as a binding element. - Traffic: applicant provided a traffic assessment; Transportation Cabinet raised no objection and did not require a full traffic‑impact study.

What’s next: the ordinance was adopted on the second reading. The development plan and required construction and stormwater plans will be subject to subsequent technical review and permitting; magistrates and staff said they expect continued coordination with KYTC on any changes to driveway alignment or pedestrian accommodations.

Ending: The court’s approval advances the applicant’s plan toward construction, but county staff and magistrates emphasized remaining site‑design details (stormwater, final landscape and possible fencing) and coordination with KYTC and utilities before building permits will be issued.