Oldham County technical review committee hears concerns over Pine Grove subdivision proposal in Prospect

The Oldham County Technical Review Committee on Jan. 15, 2025 heard a preliminary presentation of the Pine Grove subdivision, a proposal from Triple Springs Partners LLC to create 93 lots on about 156.4 acres at 10201 Kentucky Highway 329 in Prospect. Ryan Fisher, director of Oldham County Planning and Development, opened the meeting and said the TRCis convened to allow agency review and technical questions; he noted that "no testimony in favor or against the application will be taken by the TRC. That will be done at the planning commission level."

The applicant described the plan as 93 lots with a minimum lot size of 1 acre (an average net lot size of about 1.53 acres), five proposed detention basins, 22-foot-wide roadway pavements with open ditches, and a mixture of zoning on the tract (R2 at the front, the balance AG1 and CO1). Bob Vincent of Vincent Engineering and Land Surveying gave the technical overview and said utilities appear available for the project. Vincent also confirmed the existing historic house on the parcel will remain and be part of a later phase.

The committeereceived technical comments from county staff. Anna Barge, senior planner, advised the applicant to consult the USPS postmaster about mailbox type, map and describe substantial trees and other man-made features, note open-space and lot-coverage calculations, and update address lists. Jim Sullivan, county engineer, said the developer must obtain a stormwater management, stormwater quality and erosion-control permit from the county and a KY R10 permit from the Kentucky Division of Water. Sullivan also advised that the site contains two mapped blue-line streams and that impacts to streams would require coordination and permits from the Division of Water or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Because the project driveway will connect to Kentucky Highway 329, Sullivan said an encroachment permit from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet will be required and that a traffic impact study will be needed before a planning commission hearing; he estimated peak-hour trip generation of roughly 92293 trips. Matt Toler in GIS and addressing noted the historic house will require an address change if it no longer fronts on KY 329.

Charlie Ward, environmental health director at the Oldham County Health Department, reported the on-site sewage preliminary evaluation was unusually favorable: his crew dug 30 test holes to 42 inches and found soils generally suitable for full-depth septic systems, but he said each of the 92 new home lots (the 93rd lot is the existing house) will require an individual site evaluation and that lateral-field setbacks must respect identified easements, detention-basin setbacks and a natural gas pipeline. Ward also cited the countyone-acre minimum ordinance for properties served by on-site sewage systems, adopted in May 1989, and said the proposed lot sizes meet that standard.

Multiple adjoining property owners and other residents raised objections and technical concerns. Steve Porter, an attorney representing several adjoining owners, requested a second TRC meeting and said the developer had not complied with a subdivision-regulation requirement to mail a copy of the neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet and a written statement summarizing issues raised and responses to each identified neighbor. Porter asked the committee to delay further TRC consideration until the mailing occurred. Ryan Fisher and the applicantresponded that copies of the sign-in sheet and notes had been provided to planning staff as part of the TRC application and that the regulation requires the developer to mail the information but does not specify that mailings must precede TRC review; Fisher said staff would ask the applicant to mail the materials and that written public comments would be accepted up to hearing dates.

Neighbors also raised traffic and safety concerns for KY329 and Covered Bridge Road, including heavy equipment and agricultural traffic, the adequacy of turnarounds and fire protection and whether the Louisville Water Company service area could provide hydrants and required flows. Several speakers demanded more detail on stormwater runoff, pointing to existing flooding and to the project's location in the Wolf Pen/Harrods Creek watershed and in a Louisville Water Company source-water-protection area. Residents asked whether stormwater basins would increase downstream flood risk or send greater flows under KY329 to adjacent properties; county engineering staff said state and county rules require post-construction release rates to not exceed pre-development rates and that basins should be designed to hold and slowly release peak flows.

Environmental concerns included potential groundwater effects from on-site septic effluent and questions about emerging contaminants ("forever chemicals"/PFAS). Mark Fackler and Mary Lowry cited karst geology and sinkholes on and near the parcel and asked whether septic systems and future lawn chemicals could transport contaminants rapidly to streams and groundwater; staff said karst/sinkhole features are addressed by setbacks (Ward noted a 70-foot setback to lateral fields from identified sinkholes) and that the health department enforces separation distances from restrictive horizons for lateral trenches. Staff acknowledged PFAS and other emerging contaminants are an evolving regulatory area and said they would consider the concerns and, where appropriate, consult the Kentucky Division of Water.

Staff also noted procedural and next-step items: school-capacity numbers will be provided by the Oldham County School Board before the planning commission hearing; the applicant must complete the traffic-impact study and coordinate with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet; stormwater construction plans and erosion-control permits will be submitted to county engineering and to the Division of Water for the KY R10 permit during the construction-plan review stage; and the developer will enter a stormwater maintenance agreement recorded with the final plat (maintenance typically assigned to an HOA thereafter). Fisher said the next Planning Commission filing deadline is Jan. 22 for a Feb. 25 hearing and that staff would discuss with parties whether an additional TRC meeting is warranted.

No formal vote or approval occurred at the TRC meeting. The committee took agency comments and public input and left any formal decision for the Planning Commission hearing and permit reviews that follow.