The Oldham County Planning Commission on Oct. 28 approved a preliminary development plan for Summit Creek Apartments, a 196-unit complex proposed by Taylee Homes on a 20.31-acre pentagon-shaped tract along the Oldham–Jefferson county line near Hounds Lane and KY 22.

The commission voted 12–1 to approve the plan with binding elements requiring (among other provisions) that the approval be contingent on Metro Louisville/Jefferson County approval of the two units located in Jefferson County, that the developer contribute $300,000 toward off‑site improvements at the Hounds Lane–KY 22 intersection (payable to Oldham County Fiscal Court and due prior to construction plan approval if the county proceeds with a larger road project), and that the Oldham County portion be limited to 75 new housing units per year under the Oldham County Board of Education allocation.

The plan covers 20.31 acres zoned R‑4 and proposes 196 apartments in eight residential buildings (two to four stories, maximum height 45 feet), with 156 of the units located in the Oldham County portion (about 15.6 acres). The proposal includes one‑, two‑ and three‑bedroom units, a clubhouse and pool, and on‑site tree‑preservation and landscaping measures. The developer’s design yields about 9.65 dwelling units per acre; Oldham County zoning allows up to 16 units per acre where sanitary sewers are available.

In a staff presentation, Anna Barge, senior planner, reviewed the property’s history, noting earlier approvals dating to 2007 and a 2008 development plan for 69 units. County engineer Jim Silliman and applicant representatives described required stormwater, sewer and permitting steps. Silliman said the site will require an Oldham County stormwater/erosion control permit and likely state KYR‑10 and U.S. Army Corps/Kentucky Division of Water (401/404) permits because of impacts to jurisdictional streams; a stormwater maintenance agreement and drainage easements will be required prior to release of erosion‑control surety.

Traffic at the intersection of Hounds Lane and KY 22 was the primary focus of public comment and commission questions. Silliman and the applicant’s traffic consultant said the developer’s traffic study found the project would generate peak hour trips that worsen the intersection’s level of service to F absent mitigation. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) indicated by email that a left‑turn lane and road widening on KY 22 would be required for KYTC to sign off, but that KYTC would not require regrading KY 22 to correct existing vertical‑curve sight‑distance issues because those are pre‑existing conditions. Silliman presented five years of collision mapping showing rear‑end crashes at the intersection; staff and the applicant said a left‑turn lane would reduce the most common crash type there.

The developer offered two alternatives: (1) build the KYTC‑required left turn lane independently if the county cannot initiate a larger road project in time, or (2) contribute $300,000 to a county road project to fund a broader intersection improvement that could address the skew and sight‑distance constraints (county staff later estimated a larger project at roughly $494,000, with the turn‑lane component around $250,000). The approved binding element requires the $300,000 contribution be payable to Oldham County Fiscal Court and due prior to any construction plan approval, contingent on a larger county road project; if the county project cannot be initiated to meet the developer’s schedule, the developer must construct the left turn lane independently.

School capacity was addressed during the hearing. Michael Williams of the Oldham County Board of Education told commissioners the board’s policy sets a limit of 75 units per year for multifamily dwellings in Oldham County; staff and the applicant said the construction phasing will be required to comply with that cap for the Oldham portion, and only residents of units located inside Oldham County will be eligible for Oldham County Schools (residents of the two Jefferson County units would attend Jefferson County Public Schools).

Neighbor speakers raised concerns about traffic, truck volumes on Hounds Lane, potential sewer impacts on nearby lift stations and preservation of an existing tree buffer along Hounds Lane. The applicant and engineer said the project will connect to sewer, include a private pump station and tie to the South Oldham Water Quality Treatment Plant; they said the sewer connection had been reviewed by MSD (Metropolitan Sewer District) and that the pump station and lines will be located and maintained consistent with easement requirements. The applicant committed to preserve as much of the existing tree canopy along Hounds Lane as practicable and to provide a landscape and lighting plan for staff approval prior to construction plan approval.

The commission’s motion to approve was made by Commissioner Elder and seconded by Commissioner Miller. Roll call recorded 12 votes in favor and one against (Miss Davis), and the commission’s written binding elements were expanded during the meeting to include: (1) contingency on Jefferson County/Metro approval for the two Jefferson‑county buildings; (2) that no changes be made without Planning Commission and Engineer’s Office review; (3) compliance with federal, state and county ordinances and necessary easement restrictions at the time of construction plan approval; (4) 75 units per year allowed for the Oldham County portion per the Oldham County Board of Education; (5) the $300,000 contribution/left‑turn lane contingency; and (6) requirement that a landscape and lighting plan be submitted to and approved by staff prior to construction plan approval, and that trees along Hounds Lane remain except where clearing of brush or other work necessitates removal.

With the plan approved, the developer must complete required county and state permitting — including stormwater, sewer and any required KYTC approvals — and obtain construction plan approval before breaking ground. The proposal is scheduled to proceed next through Metro Louisville/Jefferson County review for the two buildings lying across the county line; applicant representatives said they had begun that submittal and were scheduled for the Development Review Committee in November.

Votes at a glance: PZ‑25‑031 (Summit Creek Apartments) — motion to approve preliminary plan with binding elements; mover: Commissioner Elder; seconder: Commissioner Miller; outcome: approved 12–1.

Ending: The commission’s approval sets conditions the developer must meet during construction plan review and ties a major traffic mitigation step — either a county project funded in part by the developer or a developer‑constructed left‑turn lane — to advancing the project. Additional permitting for stormwater, state water permits and MSD sewer work remains required before construction.